The report of the Committee of Selection has now been published with the names of the thirteen peers who are nominated by the committee to serve on the proposed Joint Committee on the Draft House of Lords Reform Bill. They are:
Labour: Baroness Andrews, Lord Richard, Lord Rooker, Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean
Conservative: Lord Norton of Louth, Baroness Shephard of Northwold, Lord Trefgarne, Lord Trimble
Liberal Democrat: Baroness Scott of Needham Market, Lord Tyler
Cross-benchers: Lord Hennessy of Nympsfield, Baroness Young of Hornsey
Lords Spiritual: Bishop of Leiecester
It is expected that Lord Richard is to be proposed to chair the Joint Committee. Remarkably, both The Times and The Daily Telegraph reported last week that he had a record of voting against an elected House. The reverse is true. He voted for a largely and wholly elected House in 2003 and 2007 and has written a book, Unfinished Business, arguing for a largely elected House.
I understand agreement has yet to be reached on the MPs who are to be nominated.
Hm.
Hmm, hmm.
I make that one bishop (good), one hereditary (good), and five former MP’s (good). Pity that there isn’t a former Law Lord on there, though.
Matt: Should you have written ‘Law Lord’? They are no more, their dignity lost to Parliament. Dignity is important here and if a QC can be granted letters patent why not an SCJ to afford them the title of Lord in absence of writ. Surely they deserve this? As for the theme of the thread: bias contrived by appointment. Should the committee have been elected?
Matt: And two professors and a Nobel Prize winner.
The fact that is is a joint committee will make it much more valuable, always assuming that the
reactionary right is not over represented from the HofC.
Humm.
A spiritual leader of a lesser-shire ?
Let us humm.
0613T21Jun11.jsdm.
If I was asked to point to an example of the UK parliament at its best, I would point people to the great work and of all the Joint Committees. Lo and behold, these committees are exactly tbe kind of ‘dog’s breakfast’ (ie, a mix of appointed and elected members) that so many peers reckon would be a disaster.