The Bishops
154. The Government's proposal is that the new chamber
should contain 16 Church of England Bishops, instead of the present
26. To recognise the "significant contribution" other
faiths can make to the chamber, the White Paper suggests that
the Appointments Commission would be expected to give "proper
recognition" to non-Church of England faith communities "as
they seek greater representativeness in the independent members
of the House".
155. The Royal Commission recommended a reduction
in the number of Bishops to allow for the representation of other
faiths. We took little evidence on this issue, but note that the
continued presence of Bishops, described by the Constitution Unit
as "a medieval hangover",[65]
based originally as much on their role as landowners as on spiritual
leadership, makes Parliament unique among modern European legislatures.
The case against seats for the Bishops is only strengthened by
the unwillingness of the Government to allow formal representation
of other faiths. We note the analysis made by Professor McLean,
who points out that the Government's aspirations in the White
Paper for representation of other religions is made mathematically
impossible by the presence of the Bishops.[66]
156. The Church of England, in a submission following
the report of the Royal Commission,[67]
made a case for the continued presence of a substantial body of
bishops in the second chamber. This was based on the view that
'a Christian perspective is an important feature of debates that
concern the common good and public life as a whole'. It called
for a 'certain minimum level of representation' to ensure that
bishops and similar groups of non-politicians can 'play an effective
role in the complex and detailed processes of the legislature'.
157. But the debate has moved on considerably since
the Royal Commission. We entirely accept the case that a healthy
variety of opinions, which could include a range of religious,
moral and ethical viewpoints, should be represented in the second
chamber. However, the political support for a very large second
chamber, of the sort that could accommodate the bench of bishops,
has diminished, with the Conservative Party for instance now proposing
a chamber of 300. The continuing process of reform, with a largely
elected second chamber and the active statutory appointments commission
we propose, would rapidly make the tradition of ex officio religious
membership an anachronism. It is of course the case that distinguished
senior figures in the Church of England (and other religious bodies)
will be considered for membership of the second chamber through
the appointments process (and they should be free to stand for
election). This appears to us to represent the fairest approach.
158. If we are serious about equipping Britain with
a modern Parliament and constitution, it is time to modernise
this aspect of our constitution too, and to bring to an end formal
representation of the church in Parliament. This need not lead
to disestablishment: there is, as the Royal Commission acknowledges,
no necessary connection between the establishment of the Church
of England and places for its Bishops in the second chamber. Disestablishment
in Wales in 1920 led to the disappearance of Bishops from that
country from the House of Lords.
159. To give the new statutory Appointments Commission
time to develop a policy on diversity in the new House, we
recommend that the Bishops of the Church of England should no
longer sit ex officio from the time of the next general
election but one. There will be nothing to prevent the Appointments
Commission from appointing Bishops, or retired Bishops, if they
have a contribution to make and can give sufficient time to the
House to make a real contribution, along with representatives
from other faith communities.
65 Constitution Unit Submission (Cmd 5291) Back
66
HC 494-II, LR 58 Back
67
Church of England Submission to the Royal Commission (Cm 4534,
2000) Back
|
