Lord Luce
I am a supporter of the Campaign for an Effective
Second Chamber and of their submission to the Joint Committee
on the draft House of Lords Reform Bill.
I have only one additional point to make. The Coalition
Government have made it clear that, in proposing a largely Elected
Chamber, there is no intention on their part to change the current
powers and responsibilities of the House of Lords as a Revising
Chamber. However the Government has not demonstrated how an Elected
Chamber would perform these responsibilities better than a reformed
Appointed House. I should make it plain, as I did on Second Reading,
that I am in favour of a substantially reformed Appointed House
of which the Steel Bill incorporates some of the required provisions
for reform.
May I ask the Joint Committee to give priority to
a full analysis as to whether a reformed Appointed House or a
substantially Elected House is best equipped to carry out the
current powers and responsibilities of the House of Lords? I suggest
that this is the salient aspect that needs assessing by the Committee
before any other proposals in the draft Bill are examined.
14 October 2011
| 
