THE ROLE OF THE HOUSE OF LORDS COMMISSION
AND ITS APPROACH TO THE FIRST ROUND OF APPOINTMENTS
INTRODUCTION
1. In January 1999 the Government published
a White Paper, Modernising Parliament: Reforming the House
of Lords. This proposed:
— the creation of Royal Commission
to examine and make recommendations about the future composition
of the House of Lords, and
— as part of the interim arrangements
for a transitional House the establishment of an independent non-statutory
House of Lords Appointments Commission.
2. The Appointments Commission[12]
was set up in May 2000 as an advisory non-departmental public
body, with the following remit:
— to recommend to Her Majesty non-political
persons for cross-bench life peerages, a role previously undertaken
by the Prime Minister; and
— to vet the suitability of all nominations
to life peerages, until then the function of the Political Honours
Scrutiny Committee.
RECOMMENDATIONS OF
CROSS-BENCH
LIFE PEERS
3. In assessing nominations the Commission
was asked to take account of:
— the merits of the individual and
her or his capacity to make an independent contribution which
will enhance and sustain the effectiveness of the House within
the constitutional framework; and
— the impact of an individual's nomination
on the composition and balance of the House as a whole, in relation
to the range of expertise, experience and outlook and the spread
of gender, age, ethnic background and geographical representation.
4. The Commission was further asked:
— to publicise the general qualities
being sought and the information required to support a nomination;
— to actively invite the public and
suitable organisations to submit names; and
— to establish processes for attracting
and assessing potential nominees which were open, transparent
and reflect best practice.
5. In September 2000, the Commission launched
its search for nominees. The Commission:
— set out its processes and the selection
criteria against which nominees would be assessed in an information
pack and on its website;
— invited members of the public to
nominate themselves;
— briefed the national and regional
media, wrote to some 10,000 organisations and organised four seminars,
in Belfast, Edinburgh, Cardiff and Manchester; and
— set a closing date of 17 November
for the first round of nominations.
6. The selection criteria, which were drawn
directly from the Commission's remit, are:
— a record of significant achievement
within the nominee's chosen way of life that demonstrates a range
of experience, skills and competencies;
— an ability to make an effective and
significant contribution to the work of the House;
— the time available to make an effective
contribution within the procedures and working practices of the
House;
— some understanding of the constitutional
framework, including the place of the House of Lords;
— outstanding personal qualities, in
particular integrity and independence;
— a strong and personal commitment
to the highest standards of public life; and
— independence of any political party.
7. By 17 November the Commission had received
3,166 nominations, by post, fax or the Internet. Between November
and March these were subject to a rigorous six-stage sifting process.[13]
In response to an invitation from the Prime Minister— who
has reserved to himself the timing of any announcement and the
number of peers to be appointed— the Commission announced
its first list of 15 nominees on 26 April.
8. The Commission's recommendations, which
were made on merit, include:
— a wide range of experience and expertise
(eg a world authority on palliative care, an expert on youth and
social exclusion, a top British businessman, a former Trustee
of Oxfam, an eminent member of the Chinese community, two prominent
scientists and a leading educationalist); and
— four women, four individuals from
an ethnic minority background and four individuals working outside
London and the South East, in Scotland, Wales, Liverpool and Yorkshire.
VETTING OF
NOMINATIONS OF
PEERAGES
9. The Commission was asked to vet nominations
to life peerages, including political nominations, for suitability.
This would include a scrutiny of any political donations (as had
been endorsed by the Committee on Standards in Public Life in
its report on the funding of political parties).
10. The Commission interpreted its role,
as had the Political Honours Scrutiny Committee, to vet nominations
for peerages for propriety. While it was clearly the task of the
Commission to take a view of the suitability of nominees for the
cross-benches, it decided that such a role would be inappropriate
in relation to those nominees put forward by the political parties
to represent them in the House. In line with convention, the Commission's
remit does not extend to those individuals who are appointed to
the House of Lords to take on ministerial responsibility.
11. Since the Commission was established
in May 2000 it has considered two groups of people in carrying
out its vetting role:
— the individuals it recommended for
appointment as non party political independent peers; and
— other nominees for appointment to
the House of Lords, the great majority of them being working peers.
THE FUTURE
12. The Commission has fulfilled the remit
given to it by Government, and in doing so has devised an open,
transparent and meritocratic appointments system. In a recent
PQ the Prime Minister endorsed the approach taken by the Appointments
Commission (attached at Annex A). He also confirmed that the Commission
would continue its role pending the establishment of a statutory
Commission.
13. In continuing its role, the Commission
will:
— welcome nominations at any time so
as to be ready to make recommendations when the Prime Minister
requests them. This means that the Commission is unlikely to run
again a major recruitment exercise - as it did for the first round
of nominations - with a fixed closing date and the expectation
of a large number of nominations;
— encourage more women, people from
an ethnic minority background and those outside London and the
South-East to make nominations;
— accept nominations of individuals
by other people as well as self-nominations; and
— continue to run a meritocratic assessment
process, using the same selection criteria as in its first round
of appointments.
12 The Commission has a limited remit compared with
that proposed for statutory Appointments Commission by both the
Royal Commission and the Government. As well as the role given
to the current Commission, a statutory Commission would be responsible
for maintaining the proportion of independents at 20 per cent
of the House, ensuring the balance of the political parties matched
the votes cast at the previous general election and making sure
the House was broadly representative of British society. Back
13
The Commission published a detailed report on its assessment
process when it announced its first recommendations in April 2000. Back
|
