House of Lords: Relevance Debate
Full Debate: Read Full DebateBaroness Hayman
Main Page: Baroness Hayman (Crossbench - Life peer)Department Debates - View all Baroness Hayman's debates with the Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport
(2 days, 12 hours ago)
Lords ChamberOn one level, this has to be a matter for the House itself. One of the ways we can all make sure that people are clear on what we do as an institution is by sharing that knowledge. I know that a huge number of noble Lords take part in the Learn with the Lords programme. Promoting what people do across the House is hugely important. I understand that 330 Members of your Lordships’ House sit on committees. I was surprised by that figure, and if I am surprised by how much work goes on behind the scenes on committees then I think we all have a role in promoting the work of our incredible committees.
My Lords, the Minister said—I think I heard her correctly—that the Government’s policy was to have a smaller House and to improve the appointments process. In that context, and if the Government really want to achieve that, is it therefore their policy to constrain the unconstrained prerogative of the Prime Minister to appoint as many Peers as possible to this House without the full scrutiny of the Appointments Commission?
We are committed to reform, and we have already taken steps to modernise the House of Lords via the House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Act. It is a long-standing precedent across the political spectrum that Governments recommend new Peers to the sovereign. Retirements and other departures mean that new Peers will be needed to ensure that the Lords has appropriate expertise. In the first instance, we intend to respond later this year to the report by the committee of the House that made recommendations.