logo
Hereditary peers make last-ditch plea to be spared in ‘ruthless purge' of Lords

Hereditary peers make last-ditch plea to be spared in ‘ruthless purge' of Lords

They argued sparing existing bloodline members would be 'a statesman-like choice' and foster future goodwill.
The House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill, which has already been through the Commons, will abolish the 92 seats reserved for members of the upper chamber who are there by right of birth.
There are currently 86 hereditary peers after the suspension of by-elections pending the legislation, the majority of whom – 44 – are Conservative.
The Bill delivers on a promise in Labour's election manifesto and has been promoted as the first step in a process of reform.
During its passage through the Lords, peers backed a change proposed by the Tories to block the expulsion of hereditary members already sitting at Westminster.
Instead, the abolition of the by-election system would see their number decline over time as individuals die or retire.
However, the Conservative amendment faces defeat when the Bill returns to the Commons, where the Government has a majority, during so-called 'ping-pong', when legislation is batted between the two Houses until agreement is reached.
Speaking at third reading, Tory shadow leader in the upper chamber Lord True warned: 'Without the fullest trust, respect and goodwill between the Government of the day and His Majesty's Opposition… this House cannot function.
'And the brutal reality is that the full exclusion of over 80 peers does not evidence full respect and cannot be the basis of full goodwill.'
He added: 'The Labour Party has won.
'No hereditary peer will ever again take their oath at this despatch box, but I submit it is not necessary on top of that, to wield the brutal axe on our colleagues who sit here now.
'That is what the amendment passed by the House for grandfather rights asked the Government to moderate.
'There is a chance and there is a choice, to temper historic victory with magnanimity in that victory.
'Such a statesman-like choice would benefit this House in keeping members we value, and at the same time, unleash a spirit of goodwill that I believe could carry us all together through the rest of this Parliament.'
Conservative hereditary peer Lord Strathclyde, who previously served as leader of the House, said: 'We all accept the mandate that the Government has to end the involvement of the hereditary principle as a route of entry to our House. But I join my colleagues of all benches still wondering why those of us already serving here are due to be flung out.
'What have these sitting parliamentarians done to deserve being shown the door in such a way?'
He added: 'It's never too late to appear gracious and magnanimous… Labour's victory in abolishing heredity here is real. Need we have such a ruthless and unnecessary purge as well?'
Tory hereditary peer Lord Mancroft argued he and his colleagues were being 'thrown out of this House like discarded rubbish'.
He said: 'We are now to be treated in a way that no one else in employment or in any workplace in Britain can be treated.
'It is rightly illegal to sack anyone on the basis of their birth except here in the upper House of this mother of parliaments.'
Lord Mancroft added: 'It is very personal to each and every one of us to be treated like this by those we considered our friends and colleagues. It is also deeply, deeply offensive, and I would simply like to know why? Is that really too much to ask?'
Responding, the Leader of the Lords Baroness Smith of Basildon again highlighted the removal of hereditary peers had been in the Labour Party manifesto.
She said: 'Of course this feels personal to those departing hereditary peers. It felt very personal to me when I lost my seat as a Member of Parliament, with far less notice.'
Lady Smith added: 'Nothing about the legislation says that we do not value the work of hereditary peers, or that of any other member of the House.
'That has always been the case, but we were quite clear that the hereditary route is not the route into the House that the country or the Labour Party expects.'
Other changes made by the Lords to the Bill, which will be considered by MPs after the summer recess, included a Conservative move to create life peers who do not have to sit at Westminster.
Peers also supported a Tory amendment to abolish unpaid ministers in the upper chamber, amid long-held concerns about Government frontbenchers in the unelected House not being remunerated for their official duties.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Extra bank holiday update for Lionesses' win as minister gives cryptic answer
Extra bank holiday update for Lionesses' win as minister gives cryptic answer

Daily Mirror

time2 hours ago

  • Daily Mirror

Extra bank holiday update for Lionesses' win as minister gives cryptic answer

Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds has given a cryptic answer after being asked about an extra bank holiday being granted to celebrate the Lionesses' historic victory A minister has given a cryptic answer after being asked about an extra bank holiday to celebrate the Lionesses' historic victory. ‌ Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds said he'd "love to announce" an additional day off but mysteriously suggested he could not do so on TV. It comes after England's women's football team won the Euro 2025 tournament in a penalty shootout against Spain last night. ‌ Asked about giving England an extra bank holiday on the back of that win, Mr Reynolds told BBC Breakfast: "There should certainly be a celebration. I can't, I'm afraid, promise the bank holiday, but there will be a reception in Downing Street today. I believe the victory parade is scheduled for tomorrow." ‌ Pressed on Keir Starmer 's previous calls for a bank holiday if England wins, the Cabinet minister replied: "Well, I'm not aware we've committed to a bank holiday on this. I'm afraid I'd love to announce that on television, this morning, but I can't do but that should rightly be a celebration for this brilliant achievement." Mr Reynolds described the Lionesses' win last night as "absolutely magnificent". He celebrated the team's performance during the tournament, which saw it clinch wins from being behind in several matches. ‌ He said: "I've never seen an England team who handle these big tournaments as well as this England team. I mean, not just the final last night, but the Sweden match or the semi. I mean, they've been so impressive in how they do this." The PM yesterday made a surprise appearance at the stadium in Basel with his wife Victoria. He branded the Lionesses "history makers" after watching the team win. ‌ The Prime Minister previously backed calls for a "proper day of celebration" for the nation when England women's football team reached the final in the last Euros tournament in 2022, which was hosted by England. The then-Opposition Leader told the Mirror: 'The whole country will be roaring on the Lionesses in the final... They have already done us proud, but if they win it will be a truly historic achievement - one that should be marked with a proper day of celebration, where clubs can open and promote access for women and girls.' England went on to win the match against Germany but the former Tory government did not grant a bank holiday for the nation to celebrate the historic victory. The Lionesses' historic Euro 2025 victory will be celebrated at a special reception at No10 today. Deputy PM Angela Rayner, who will host the team, this morning said it'll be "a privilege to celebrate this amazing win with them in Downing Street".

Radical tax and retirement proposal that could affect every Aussie: What you need to know
Radical tax and retirement proposal that could affect every Aussie: What you need to know

Daily Mail​

time3 hours ago

  • Daily Mail​

Radical tax and retirement proposal that could affect every Aussie: What you need to know

Public servants within Anthony Albanese 's own government have suggested access to the age pension needs to be wound back for wealthy baby boomers because it's too costly. The Department of Social Services - in an incoming brief to new Social Services Minister Tanya Plibersek - suggested lower-income Australians were paying for the lifestyles of the rich, who were living off the age pension under existing rules exempting the family home from the assets test. 'Low-and-middle income taxpayers are subsidising the retirement incomes of seniors with significant wealth in addition to their homes,' it said. The departmental brief, prepared independently of the new Labor minister's office, noted couples could still receive the age pension even as they continued to earn six-figure annual incomes from their investments. 'Age pension continues to be payable to couples with income of almost $100,000 a year or assets of almost $1.05million, in addition to their principal home of unlimited value,' it said. The department said this was unfair compared with the treatment of the unemployed, who had to wait 13 weeks to receive JobSeeker if they had more than $11,500 in the bank. A spokeswoman for Ms Plibersek said the government had no plans to impose a stricter assets test for the age pension. 'The government appreciates independent, frank and fearless advice from its agencies,' she told Daily Mail Australia. The Department of Social Services - in an incoming brief to new Social Services Minister Tanya Plibersek (pictured) - suggested lower-income Australians were paying for the lifestyles of the rich, living off the age pension under existing rules exempting the family home from the assets test 'The government has no plans to include the family home in the pension assets test.' This is despite Treasury forecasting an 'expected increase in the number of age pension recipients as the Australian population ages'. More than $109billion is set to be spent on aged care in 2025-26 as government spending as a proportion of the economy hits the highest level since 1986 outside of Covid. Capital gains tax discount Ahead of the government's Economic Reform Roundtable next month, Westpac chief economist Luci Ellis has suggested scrapping the 50 per cent capital gains tax discount, introduced in 1999, because it fuelled property market speculation and made houses unaffordable. 'There is a lot of prior work pointing out the incentives to speculate in property created by discounted CGT,' she told Daily Mail Australia. 'The issue is that discounting CGT, as currently, means that people would rather have capital gains than cash income from an investment. 'So it means people are better off from a tax perspective buying an existing property than investing in a business or some other productivity-enhancing investment.' Ms Ellis, a former assistant governor at the Reserve Bank of Australia, has proposed replacing the 50 per cent capital gains tax discount with indexation fixed at 2.5 per cent, or the mid-point of the RBA's two to three per cent inflation target. 'This is easier to calculate and doesn't require people to know the history of inflation to calculate their tax liability,' she said. 'My proposal to instead charge full marginal tax rate on CGT will eliminate the incentive to favour capital-gains-producing investments over productivity-boosting ones.' Ms Ellis' call to axe the 50 per cent capital gains tax discount, on behalf of Westpac Economics, is shared by grassroots group Labor for Housing and the Greens. She put that view last week to teal MP Allegra Spender's tax roundtable in Canberra, but Labor had ruled out that option in Opposition after losing the 2016 and 2019 elections with that policy. Her call on the capital gains tax is not the view of the Westpac Banking Group, which is this week putting in a separate submission to the government's Economic Reform Roundtable. With only deficits forecast in coming years, the Department of Social Services noted funding welfare for the elderly would be a financial challenge, with the proportion of Australians older than 65 increasing by 31 per cent since 2000. Almost two-thirds, or 65 per cent, of people aged 65 and over receive income support payments, with 92 per cent of them getting the age pension. Australians can access the age pension at 67. 'Australia's demographics are evolving and will have broader implications for fiscal and social policy and demands for services,' the department said. 'Life expectancy is rising, and fertility rates are declining, reducing the working age population and influencing family composition and structures.' The department also suggested Australia would continue relying on high immigration so there was tax revenue from a working age population to support older Australians. 'Overseas migration is expected to continue to support population growth, offsetting demographic and economic challenges to some extent, as higher immigration correlates with higher tax revenue and increases in working-age population,' it said. Unaffordable housing was likely to see younger generations become increasingly reliant on their parents for housing. 'Concerns of intergenerational inequalities are growing, and young people's circumstances are falling short of their expectations,' the Department of Social Services said. 'As more rely on family for financial support and/or housing well into adulthood, they experience delayed milestones including education, employment, family, and home ownership. 'Many also struggle with compounding and competing responsibilities of paid employment and unpaid care. 'This has implications on household incomes, workforce participation, gender equality, and may have greater social, economic, and intergenerational ramifications.'

Mental health crisis is overblown, say public
Mental health crisis is overblown, say public

Telegraph

time3 hours ago

  • Telegraph

Mental health crisis is overblown, say public

The mental health crisis is overblown and people often exaggerate their problems, according to a poll of public beliefs. More than half (56 per cent) of the public believe mental health conditions are exaggerated, while three quarters (76 per cent) think some people mistake life's normal ups and downs for mental illness, according to the survey of more than 2,000 adults by Electoral Calculus. With the Government facing a backbench rebellion over its efforts to restrict welfare benefits, the survey also suggests that ministers – rather than their backbenchers – may have better judged the pulse of the nation. The poll showed more than half of voters (52 per cent) believed that it was too easy for people to claim benefits for mental health illnesses, against 35 per cent who thought it was too hard and 13 per cent who believed it was about right. Last month, Sir Keir Starmer was forced to back down on controversial plans to slash disability and sickness benefits after more than 120 of his MPs threatened to vote against the proposals. Although the public believe benefits are too readily available, they are evenly divided on whether it is too easy or too hard to prove a mental illness in the UK. Some 44 per cent said it was too easy, while 43 per cent said it was too hard. However, Tory and Reform supporters were more likely to believe it was too easy to be diagnosed as suffering from a mental health condition, with 74 per cent of Conservative voters and 55 per cent from Nigel Farage's party saying it was the case. It comes as the head of the Government's workplace review said that employees who have 'I hate my boss syndrome' should not be signed off sick with a mental health condition. Sir Charlie Mayfield said he was concerned some problems are being 'over-medicalised' when they could be solved in the office. The former John Lewis chairman has been appointed by Liz Kendall, the work and pensions secretary, to come up with plans to stop workers leaving their jobs because of poor health. His report is due this autumn. One in five people of working age have a health condition that affects their job and there are 2.8 million people inactive due to ill health – up from 2.1 million since before the Covid pandemic, although the numbers had been rising for several years. Sir Charlie told The Sunday Times: 'The last thing I wish to do is trivialise [mental health conditions] but I agree that things do get over-medicalised.' Half of those polled (49 per cent) agreed that society spends too much time talking about minor mental illnesses. This rose to 77 per cent of Conservatives and 62 per cent of Reform supporters compared with just 35 per cent of Labour voters. Three quarters (74 per cent) said that social media often led to people thinking they had a mental illness when they did not. However, despite the scepticism about 'over medicalisation' of mental ill health, the public believe by five to one majority (68 per cent to 14 per cent) that there were not enough services available to meet the needs of people suffering from mental health problems. Eight in 10 people believed that mental illness had been stigmatised for too long and that it was healthy for people to talk about it more. Seven in 10 also felt that people with serious mental illness are losing out because of the attention given to the growing numbers of people saying they have less serious mental illness. Martin Baxter, the chief executive of Electoral Calculus, said: 'The public shows strong support for tackling stigma and being open about mental health, yet many worry that everyday challenges are being labelled as mental illness, risking the needs of those with serious conditions being overlooked. 'Mental health policy looks set to become a key political battleground, and these findings suggest that politicians will need to tread carefully as they respond to growing public scepticism and a system that most feel isn't working.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store