The end of hereditary aristocracy is one step closer

The House of Lords has been plagued by extinction events for hundreds of years.

In 1649, following the execution of King Charles I, the system was abolished under a law declaring it “useless and dangerous to the people of England.”

The House of Lords was resurrected 11 years later and remains largely intact to this day, to the chagrin of reformist governments past and present.

But with Labor winning the general election, there is now a new enthusiasm for change.

A draft law to remove hereditary peers from the House of Lords passed the next stage on Tuesday.

Labor has 92 seats belonging to hereditary aristocrats who inherit titles from their families, and in its general election manifesto it pledged to abolish these seats.

It would be the next phase of reforms launched by the previous Labor government, which removed most hereditary MPs from the House of Representatives in 1999 in a compromise deal with the Conservatives, leaving just 92 MPs.

The Labor government described the bill as “the biggest constitutional reform of the British Parliament in a quarter of a century”.

Introducing the bill for the second time, Constitutional Affairs Minister Nick Thomas-Symonds said it was a “long overdue” change.

“The temporary arrangements of 1999 should not continue,” the minister said.

He said: “The appointment of people to our legislative bodies is an innate and irrevocable act” and “it is important that our second chamber represents modern Britain”.

But that wasn’t enough for SNP MP Pete Wishart.

Wishart invoked the spirit of 1649, asking whether Labor would abolish the House of Lords entirely, as the SNP has called for.

Wishart: “We are faced with an embarrassing and irreformable laughing stock, the Prime Minister’s plaything and the embodiment of a dying institution from another era.

“That’s why I’m so proud that my party will never put anyone into that red leather-upholstered, gilded Narnia.”

Thomas Symonds said: ” [Labour] The manifesto states that we should have a Second House that is more representative of the country and the region.

Now that the opposition is less restrained, some Conservative MPs are urging Labor to be bolder, including Sir Gavin Williamson.

Former education and defense minister asks why Labor plans to set peer retirement age at 80 Not in the bill.

“I am willing to buck my whip to bring about the reforms and changes that so many of us want to see,” Sir Gavin said.

Other Tories are more conservative, including Shadow Deputy Prime Minister Sir Oliver Dowden.

Sir Oliver tried unsuccessfully to amend the bill and prevent its development.

He told MPs: “The checks and balances of the House of Lords, its tried and tested practices – work.”

Ultimately, MPs voted to approve the bill, meaning it entered the committee stage of the legal process.

The real pushback is expected to come later when the bill reaches the House of Lords.

The persistent hereditary nobles may not go quietly. Old wars are reignited.

As early as 1999, a hereditary Conservative peer, the Earl of Onslow, Said he would behave like a “football hooligan” Opposition to New Labour’s abolitionist agenda.

Although former prime minister Tony Blair pledged in his manifesto to end the right of hereditary peers to sit and vote in the House of Lords, it was ultimately watered down.

Twenty-five years later, another Labor manifesto promised to do just that.