logo
Tears for peers: Hereditary Lords face up to extinction

Tears for peers: Hereditary Lords face up to extinction

BBC News20-04-2025
Imprisoned in the Tower of London in 1538 waiting to be executed, Henry Courtenay, the Earl of Devon, wrote on his cell walls words which would become his family's motto - "Where have I fallen, what have I done?"Nearly 500 years later, another Earl of Devon, is once again contemplating getting the chop. Charlie Courtenay, the 19th or 38th Earl of Devon, depending on how you count it, is one of the 87 remaining hereditary peers who will be kicked out of the House of Lords this year, if the government's House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill passes. He is fairly relaxed about his impending departure. Henry Courtenay's beheading was one of four the family has suffered, so for the current Earl of Devon "executions" - as he puts it - are nothing new. "For us hereditaries, that's what happens."
For hundreds of years, hereditary peers had the right to make and debate laws in Parliament, a right they inherited from their fathers and passed on to their sons. In 1999, then Prime Minister Tony Blair described their presence in the House of Lords as an "anachronism" and got rid of more than 600 of them but, following what was supposed to be a temporary compromise, 92 were saved.Twenty-five years on, a new Labour government has come to power and is hoping to get rid of the ones who remain.The BBC has spoken to four of those peers preparing to pack up their parliamentary desks.
'Awkward and embarrassing'
Charlie Courtenay is happy to talk about his family's long history but growing up he felt uncomfortable about his privileged background. "It's obviously awkward and embarrassing on a personal front. Particularly it doesn't help if you live in a castle - you feel a bit like the odd one out.""I moved away from England for ten years and lived in America, where it suddenly became a lot easier. "By moving to America, where the response was 'gee, that's really interesting, tell me more', I learnt to talk about it with a bit more confidence."His distant ancestor, Baldwin de Redvers was given the title in 1142 a reward for backing Empress Matilda's right to the throne.He inherited it following his father's death in 2015, and began to think more deeply about what it meant to be an earl. His father had been kicked out of the House of Lords in the 1999 cull but his son was able to return via a by-election process, by which hereditaries who have died can be replaced by others from the same political grouping. He says he remembers thinking "here's a nice opportunity to provide a Devon voice in Westminster which is exactly the job Baldwin was given 900 years ago."
The Earl of Devon is what he calls an "unashamed" proponent of hereditary peers. "I am the one person who defends the indefensible," he jokes.He argues that, at a time of concern about the "rabid consumption of our natural world" hereditaries offer a "long-term, multi-generational view" and are less likely to be focused on short term political gains. With his remaining months, he is hoping to, if not change the law, then get some support for his amendment to remove what he calls "the patriarchal, misogynistic" rules that bar women from inheriting most titles."I find it faintly, totally ridiculous, embarrassing and wrong that my sisters and my aunt or my daughter can't inherit the title."Whether or not his amendments are accepted, it is all but certain that his children will not get the chance to sit in the Lords based on the title alone - a fact the earl is more than resigned to. "The big time for the Courtenay family was around 1100. Ever since then it's been a kind of slight gentle winding down of glories. "This is just another step on the route to ignominy."
'Sticking plaster'
"I will not miss commuting 672 miles there and back every week," says Lord Thurso, a Liberal Democrat peer. He lives in Thurso, a town which is on the north coast of Scotland and about as far from the Lords as you can be without getting on a boat. He has no problem with hereditary peers getting the boot ("the idea we have some unique quality is laughable," he says) but doubts it will make much difference."This is another sticking plaster over something that really needs to be dealt with."He says the Lords have good debates and scrutinise the government's plans "extremely well" but "does it actually get us anywhere? It doesn't."To have influence with the government, the Lords needs legitimacy, he says."A house full of largely retired MPs put out to grass for 30 or 40 years or people like me who inherited it because their grandfather was cabinet secretary? That's no way to put together a second chamber." In 2012, he worked on a doomed plan that would have seen the Lords made up of a combination of elected and appointed peers. He says there is not "cat in hell's chance" of the government making any further changes once the current bill is passed. He wants to see ministers use the legislation to make other changes including a 20 year term limit for new peers and a restriction on the size of the house. "If you've got those two, well, then we can wait another 100 years or so for democracy," he sighs.
'We've had six murders here'
Lord Howe inherited his title from a son-less second cousin in 1984, along with Penn House, a stately Buckinghamshire home. "My wife and I lived in a small terrace house in London. She was a teacher. I was working in bank."All of a sudden I had a call to say I'd inherited the title."It was a shock to the system - particularly when you arrive on a dark January evening, the front door creaks open and there is a butler saying 'Welcome home your Lordship'. And it didn't feel like home at all."The heating bill cost more than his annual salary, he remembers.
Just a few years after becoming a peer, he was made a minister by then Conservative prime minister John Major ("Must have been scraping the barrel," he says).He's been on the front bench of his party ever since in various roles.Nearly 40 years on, his enthusiasm for the Lords has not diminished. "I love the place. I've found it very fulfilling. And just occasionally you feel that you've done a little bit of good."
'A bad political misjudgement'
Lord Hacking is a rare thing - a Labour hereditary peer. There are only four of his kind, a fact that partly explains the government's enthusiasm to get rid of hereditaries.He got the title in 1971, but never expected to stay so long.He assumed hereditary peers would soon be removed and decided that once kicked out he could run to be an MP. "It didn't quite work out like," he says. "A bad political misjudgement." "I remained in the House of Lords until 1999 when I was 62 and that was a bit late then to think about getting into the House of Commons. He backs his party's position on hereditary peers but not without regret. "I wouldn't say I'm happy to get rid of them. I'm sad but I think what will happen... is that the very best of the hereditary peers will be invited to have a life peerage."I'm sure there will be a compromise. We always compromise out of situations in England."You can listen to the interviews on BBC Radio 4's The Westminster Hour on BBC Sounds
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Could Jeremy Corbyn's new party actually come to Starmer's rescue?
Could Jeremy Corbyn's new party actually come to Starmer's rescue?

The Independent

timea minute ago

  • The Independent

Could Jeremy Corbyn's new party actually come to Starmer's rescue?

As you may have noticed, there's been some speculation driven by opinion polling that a 'new, well-organised' Jeremy Corbyn-led party could take as much as 10 per cent to the vote at a general election – and smash Labour's prospects of a second term. I think we need to think that through a bit more. For starters, we have that glorious oxymoron – a 'well-organised' Corbynista party. I think, on the basis of the British left's unsurpassed record for splits, rows, delusion and chaos, we should all recalibrate our expectations to contemplate how a badly organised Corbyn-led party might change the scene. Here, I think the voters might find good reason not to put their faith in the new 'movement, ,such as it is. It seems disconcerting that the putative co-leaders of the organisation, the independent MP Jeremy Corbyn and Zarah Sultana – also ex-Labour, and also an independent – seem to be operating almost entirely, well, independently, if you'll pardon the joke. When the party was first launched a few weeks ago, Sultana put out a statement to that effect and declared herself co-leader. This seemed to take Corbyn entirely by surprise, and, according to some possibly mischievous reporting, a bit annoyed. Now this improbable dream team seem to have done it again. Interviewed on television, putting on as cheery a face on the lack of co-ordination as he could, Corbyn declared that he and his colleague were 'all fine" and that 'we're working absolutely together on this'. But he didn't know where she was – possibly in Coventry (where he might like to send her for good) – and they'd been in touch on the phone. What one would give to read the transcript of that. Theoretically, the Corbyn-Sultana, or Sultana-Corbyn, combo would be one of the great dream tickets of our time – the equivalent, for an Arsenal fan such as Jezza, of Thierry Henry and Dennis Bergkamp, or the way Tony Blair and John Prescott balanced the different strands of Labour thinking in the old days. Corbyn would be the elder statesman: experienced, lost two elections in a row, that sort of thing. Sultana, on the other hand, would represent youth, hope, optimism and the certainty of losing many more general elections in future. Let them go forward together! In reality, of course, Corbyn has always had a rather vain streak; he greatly enjoyed being Labour leader and succumbed too easily to the propaganda about him generated by his fanatical army of Corbynistas. He doesn't seem quite as tolerant of dissent as he makes out. If the Sultana-Corbyn partnership is serious about building this new party, then why didn't the pair of them turn up at some big rally, or at least at the same press conference, hand in hand, arm in arm? Political parties, like marriages, are made much more difficult if they're conducted at long distance. The media folk can't fall back on Photoshop or AI to get a shot of the couple together. Maybe, indeed, Corbyn and Sultana are like those other apparently fun double acts who actually hated each other behind the scenes – like Wilfrid Brambell and Harry H Corbett who played Steptoe and Son, in which the old man always frustrated the aspirational ambitions of his offspring. Funnily enough. At the moment, they don't seem to be able to agree on a name – not for the double act, but the party (though 'Steptoe and Daughter' does spring to mind). Sultana had to quickly take to social media to point out that 'Your Party' was just a working title, and the actual name is yet to be decided. I'm wondering whether we might be in this position because she might not be that keen on 'Peace and Justice', which is literally owned by Corbyn (Companies House number 12945855) and was established as his own political vehicle when he was being pushed out of Labour. Sultana might well have ideas of her own about her party. In Pythonesque style, I look forward to the debate at the first party assembly about whether Peace and Justice works as well as Justice and Peace. Card vote on that one, I guess. Anyone on the left with any hopes about this being a properly run, disciplined and, indeed, well-organised party with clear policies and precise messaging should also wince with fear at Corbyn's latest thinking on his locally autonomous, grassroots movement: 'This is going to be community-led, community-based, grassroot-led, this is going to be very different, and you know what? It's going to be fun.' Well, you know what? The people who are going to have the most fun with Your Party are sods like me in the media who'll find it far too easy to satirise. The people who'll have no fun at all are the ones who'll have to live under a Farage government, thanks to this latest bunch of 'splitters', if I can use such a traditional socialistic term. I give it six months before Sultana and Corbyn have both left to start their own parties. Jeremy can have Justice, and Zarah can have Peace – each get half of the remaining membership (Corbynistas Vs Sultanas) and Starmer's Labour Party (and the rest of us) can forget all about them. The net effect, as it happens, may be to discredit Starmer's critics on his left; re-centre the Labour Party away from its fringes; remind disgruntled Labour backbenchers how voting against the government endangers their administration; and halt the rise of the Greens, which had become a natural repository for disgruntled hard leftists. It's unpredictable – but the last thing the country needs is a more anarchic version of the Labour Party, with Jeremy and Zarah being job-share co-prime ministers. Not fun.

Cabinet minister calls Corbyn ‘chaotic' after new party launch
Cabinet minister calls Corbyn ‘chaotic' after new party launch

South Wales Argus

timea minute ago

  • South Wales Argus

Cabinet minister calls Corbyn ‘chaotic' after new party launch

Technology Secretary Peter Kyle said that the Islington North MP 'doesn't think about governing, he thinks about posturing' and praised the leadership of Mr Corbyn's successor Sir Keir Starmer. The ex-Labour leader promised a 'new kind of political party' when he launched the as yet unnamed project with Zarah Sultana on Thursday. Asked about the move, Mr Kyle reflected on what he called the 'chaos and instability' of Mr Corbyn's leadership. Speaking on Times Radio, Mr Kyle said: 'He's not a serious politician. He doesn't think about governing, he thinks about posturing. And we see that writ large at the moment, because all the posturing, of course, just puts him at odds with his own supporters, which is why you've got George Galloway saying he won't join it.' It's time for a new kind of political party – one that belongs to you. Sign up at — Jeremy Corbyn (@jeremycorbyn) July 24, 2025 He later added: 'The Labour Party is now led by somebody who has the very clear interest of our country at heart. It is country first, and that's the kind of thing I think people are responding to. 'We see Keir acting incredibly well on the international stage in recent months, tackling some of the big issues facing the world and its economy and he's thrown himself into fixing our public services. I think this is the kind of leadership that people respond to, not that of the chaotic Jeremy Corbyn.' Mr Corbyn said on Friday that '200,000 people have signed up' after Thursday's launch. Wow. In under 24 hours, 200,000 people have signed up to build a real alternative to poverty, inequality and war. Something special is happening – be part of it at — Jeremy Corbyn (@jeremycorbyn) July 25, 2025 The movement has the website with a welcome message saying 'this is your party' – but Ms Sultana said: 'It's not called Your Party.' Mr Corbyn denied on Thursday that the launch had been 'messy'. His statement on X came after Ms Sultana said she was launching the party with Mr Corbyn earlier this month, but the former Labour leader appeared unready to formally announce the move until now. 'It's not messy at all. It's a totally coherent approach,' he told reporters. 'It's democratic, it's grassroots and it's open.' He also said that he and Coventry South MP Ms Sultana are 'working very well together'. Asked why it was him alone doing broadcast media to launch the party, and also asked where Ms Sultana was, he said: 'We're working absolutely together on this. 'She happens to be, as far as I know at this moment, in Coventry. 'I was in touch with her just a few moments ago. So it's all fine. We're working very well together, all of us.'

Corbyn throws his weight behind striking Birmingham bin workers
Corbyn throws his weight behind striking Birmingham bin workers

Powys County Times

timea minute ago

  • Powys County Times

Corbyn throws his weight behind striking Birmingham bin workers

Ex-Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn has lent his support to striking Birmingham bin workers on the picket line – and warned that defeat in the dispute would lead to councils in other areas threatening wage cuts. A day after Birmingham City Council said it had launched contempt of court proceedings against the Unite trade union over the all-out strike which began in March, Mr Corbyn said central government was underfunding local authorities. Addressing more than 100 workers and other protesters at a 'mega-picket' event outside a council refuse depot in the Tyseley area, the MP for Islington North, told the crowd: 'It wasn't the Birmingham bin workers that spent ludicrous amounts of money on the Commonwealth Games. 'And it wasn't the bin workers who created any of the problems that Birmingham faces. They are the people that keep this city clean. 'I am here today to support you but also to make this point. 'Birmingham is not isolated and Birmingham is not alone – the financial issues that affect Birmingham are actually there in almost every local authority in the country, particularly in the big urban cities. 'And those problems are that they have not enough money. The Government is not spending enough money on local government.' Mr Corbyn warned: 'Local government services are under pressure and in many cases, even without the Birmingham model, still facing cuts. 'If we win in Birmingham and they are not allowed to cut wages, not allowed to destroy conditions, not allowed to damage the working rights of bin workers, that's a huge victory. 'But if we lose, think which city is going to be next. 'That is the point. And so I say to the wider community – get behind the Birmingham bin workers.' The second, so-called mega-picket, with speakers from other trade unions, following a similar event in May, involved members of 26 organisations protesting at fives sites in Birmingham and Coventry on Friday. The city council said on Thursday night that it had had 'persistent evidence' of a breach of a court order previously agreed with Unite. A city council spokesperson said: 'We are taking this step to ensure the safety of our city and the safety of our workforce, including those who are on strike. 'Our injunction prevents the blocking of our refuse collection vehicles, both at our depots and on the streets. Despite writing repeatedly to Unite for several weeks to highlight what we believe to be clear breaches of the injunction, the situation has worsened. 'Since the injunction was granted, vehicles have been blockaded on roads to and from our depots, with Unite representatives and members stepping in front of, and even leaning against, moving heavy vehicles and blocking road junctions.' A Unite spokesperson said: 'The court application is the latest distraction from the real task of resolving the ongoing dispute. 'The court papers will be subject to a careful review and the interests of Unite and our members will be fully represented at any future hearing.' Speaking after his speech, Mr Corbyn urged the leader of Labour-run Birmingham City Council, John Cotton, not to dig himself into a hole and to settle the dispute. Mr Corbyn said: 'There has to be a settlement and they should not be facing a wage cut. 'We just don't need to stretch this thing out.' Asked what his message to Mr Cotton would be, he added: 'John, get a deal. Get a settlement, get the bin workers back to work. 'And remember, a lot of the public support the bin workers even though obviously it (the strike) does create difficulties.'

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