Examines the debates and developments about House of Lords reform since 1911, and notes that disagreements have occurred within, as well as between, the main political parties and governments throughout this time. It draws attention to how various proposals for reform have raised a wider range constitutional and political problems.

House of Lords reform is often characterised as unfinished business: a riddle that has been left unanswered since 1911. But rarely can an unanswered riddle have had so many answers offered, even though few have been accepted; indeed, when Viscount Cave was invited in the mid-1920s to lead a Cabinet committee on Lords reform, he complained of finding 'the ground covered by an embarrassing mass of proposals'.That embarrassing mass increased throughout the twentieth century. Much ink has been spilled on what should be done with the upper House of Parliament; much less ink has been expended on why reform has been so difficult to achieve. This book analyses in detail the principal attempts to reform the House of Lords. Starting with the Parliament Act of 1911 the book examines the century of non-reform that followed, drawing upon substantial archival sources, many of which have been under-utilised until now. These sources challenge many of the existing understandings of the history of House of Lords reform and the reasons for success or failure of reform attempts. The book begins by arguing against the popular idea that the 1911 Act was intended by its supporters to be a temporary measure. 'No one – peers included – should be allowed to pronounce about the future of the House of Lords without reading Chris Ballinger's authoritative, shrewd and readable account about reform attempts over the past century. He punctures several widely-held myths and claims in the current debate.' Rt Hon Peter Riddell CBE Director, Institute for Government and former Hansard Society chair 'This is at once an impeccably researched academic study, and a thoroughly readable account loaded with lessons for today's would-be Lords reformers.' Lord (David) Lipsey

This book is the only one of its kind, providing a clear and exhaustive analysis of the different approaches to the future of Britain's second chamber. The House of Lords has long been the subject of proposals for reform some successful, others not and calls for the existing membership to be replaced by elected members have been a staple of political debate. The debate has been characterised by heat rather than light, proponents and opponents of change often talking past one another. This work gives shape to the debate, drawing out the role of the House of Lords, previous attempts at reform, and the different approaches to the future of the House. It develops the argument for each and analyses the current state of the debate about the future of the upper house in Britain's political system.

This is a draft Bill and white paper on proposals to change the House of Lords into a more democratically elected second chamber. A cross-party Committee met seven times from June to December 2010 and considered all reform issues related to the House of Lords. Agreement was reached on a large number of issues but differences in opinion remain on the size of the elected element and the type of electoral system. The Government now wants to take the discussion forward to a debate on the detail. Proposals include an 80 percent elected House of Lords but a wholly elected House of Lords has not been ruled out. The Draft Bill sets out elections using the Single Transferable Vote system but it is recognised that a case can be made for other proportional systems too. Other proposals, name, size, functions, powers and term length are some of several issues discussed.

Painting a detailed portrait of the House of Lords since reform removed most hereditary members in 1999, this book demonstrates the chamber's newly diverse membership and substantial policy impact in British politics. It also places the Lords in a comparative context, asks if it can be considered 'legitimate', and examines the likelihood of reform.

The last decade has seen radical changes in the way we are governed. Reforms such as the Human Rights Act and devolution have led to the replacement of one constitutional order by another. This book is the first to describe and analyse Britain's new constitution, asking why it was that the old system, seemingly hallowed by time, came under challenge, and why it is being replaced. The Human Rights Act and the devolution legislation have the character of fundamental law. They in practice limit the rights of Westminster as a sovereign parliament, and establish a constitution which is quasi-federal in nature. The old constitution emphasised the sovereignty of Parliament. The new constitution, by contrast, emphasises the separation of powers, both territorially and at the centre of government. The aim of constitutional reformers has been to improve the quality of government. But the main weakness of the new constitution is that it does little to secure more popular involvement in politics. We are in the process of becoming a constitutional state, but not a popular constitutional state. The next phase of constitutional reform, therefore, is likely to involve the creation of new forms of democratic engagement, so that our constitutional forms come to be more congruent with the social and political forces of the age. The end-point of this piecemeal process might well be a fully codified or written constitution which declares that power stems not from the Queen-in Parliament, but, instead, as in so many constitutions, from `We, the People'. The old British constitution was analysed by Bagehot and Dicey. In this book Vernon Bogdanor charts the significance of what is coming to replace it. The expenses scandal shows up grave defects in the British constitution. Vernon Bogdanor shows how the constitution can be reformed and the political system opened up in`The New British Constitution'.

The departure of most of the hereditary peers from the House of Lords has made it necessary to focus on the basic questions: what is the role of the second chamber, and what is the rational base on which it should be constructed?