House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Cabinet Office

House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill

Edward Leigh Excerpts
Tuesday 15th October 2024

(1 day, 15 hours ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Nick Thomas-Symonds Portrait Nick Thomas-Symonds
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

No, because the monarchy is a completely different part of our constitution. First, no monarch since Queen Anne has refused Royal Assent to a law. Secondly, our constitutional monarchy enjoys popular support. I return the right hon. Gentleman’s respect, and the one thing he is is honest. He is actually setting out a defence of the hereditary principle, rather than hiding behind a smokescreen, which seems to be the position of Conservative Front Benchers, from whom we will hear in due course.

I want young people growing up in Blaenavon, Pontypool and Cwmbran in my constituency, and indeed in every part of the country, to feel that they have the same chance as anyone else to play a part in making the laws of the land. The continued presence of hereditary peers in our legislature is indefensible in a modern democracy.

Edward Leigh Portrait Sir Edward Leigh (Gainsborough) (Con)
- Hansard - -

The trouble with this sort of partial reform is that it opens other issues. Why does the Church of England have a monopoly on places in the House of Lords? I am all in favour of the established Church, and of letting it have perhaps 12 bishops, but why can we not share the other places between this country’s other Christian denominations and non-Christian faiths? Do they not deserve a voice?

Nick Thomas-Symonds Portrait Nick Thomas-Symonds
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I am certainly in favour of the representation of different faiths in the upper House, but the Government set out a step-by-step process in our manifesto.