This is the first time that I have spoken from the Front Bench in a substantive policy debate, so may I say what a privilege it is to follow so many eminent Members of the House across the divide?
The other place has a long and distinguished past. It has had and continues to have many illustrious hard-working Members. We do well to remember that. However, the arguments for a reformed upper House are not new. Indeed, some 60 years ago, a Labour Prime Minister, Clement Attlee, said that the upper House was like a glass of champagne that had been left for five days.
My party believes that there is an overwhelming case for reform. In both our 2001 and 2005 election manifestos, we were committed to a substantially elected upper Chamber. We want a democratic and accountable upper House that reflects the modern 21st century. It is indeed ironic at a time when the public is becoming ever more distanced and disenchanted with the political process that we may inadvertently be assisting that disenchantment by not allowing the public to have a say in the formation of the upper House.
The hon. Member for Wirral, South (Ben Chapman) said that the standing of politicians was ““low””. Although I agree with him on that, I confess that I did not agree with his conclusion about how best to resolve the issue.
A substantially elected upper Chamber would have greater legitimacy to question and amend Government policy. It will also allow for a greater breadth of expertise and enable its Members to operate with greater independence. My hon. Friend the Member for Aldridge-Brownhills (Mr. Shepherd) summed it up well when he said that those who make the laws should be accountable to those for whom they are made—a sentiment echoed by the hon. Member for Bishop Auckland (Helen Goodman) when she said that those who legislate should be elected by those over whom they legislate.
The arguments for legitimacy and accountability were also put by the hon. Member for Edmonton (Mr. Love), while the hon. Member for Slough (Fiona Mactaggart) made clear her support for 50 per cent. and above to be elected members of the upper House.
House of Lords Reform
Proceeding contribution from
Shailesh Vara
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 6 March 2007.
It occurred during Debate on House of Lords Reform.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
457 c1483-4 
Session
2006-07
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 12:19:54 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_383738
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_383738
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_383738