Tag: UK General Election 2024

Labour’s House of Lords Reform – good, but kicking out 80 year olds is age discrimination.

For the last four years I have worked in the House of Lords. I admit that initially I was sceptical as to the value of an unelected chamber, especially one which still included hereditary peers.

My views have changed since. No, not out of self interest (the Lords is not my primary source of income), but through seeing up close the value add having of having a second chamber with people who are subject matter experts scrutinising legislation. Many Lords are not partisan, and those that are quite often speak independently from their party on policy matters they are experts in. The Committee Reports are of a considerably higher standard than that of the Commons, or indeed of most UK think tanks.

This being said, I do believe the House of Lords is in serious need of reform. Just over a year ago I posted my view on the Gordon Brown report on constitutional reform. While I agree with his recommendations for greater devolution in to regions in England, and strengthening the powers of governments in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, I disagreed with his recommendations for the Lords.

Firstly, he proposes changes to the Lords, but recommended no changes to the Commons. Replacing antiquated and unrepresentative First Past the Post Electoral System with Mix-Member Proportional (as used in Germany and New Zealand) would do far more to improve politics in Westminster than any changes to the Lords.

Secondly, his proposal to create an elected chamber representative of the nations and regions of the UK could just create another House of Commons. Alternatively, it might give disproportionate power to smaller nations as a way of heading off independence campaigns. Neither of these options would in themselves improve Westminster functions.

Labour’s election manifesto commitments regarding Lords reform are overall quite sound. In 2024, hereditary Lords is indefensible. While some of the hereditary Peers make decent contributions in the Lords, as a point of principle hereditary titles must cease.

Labour have also committed to reviewing the appointments process in response to the current Government stacking it with supporters who should never have been admitted. There are too many members of the Lords, which is something a more robust appointment process can help address.

Where Labour’s proposal has gone seriously wrong is to force members of the Lords to retire at the age of 80. The last act of the previous Labour Government was to pass the Equalities Act 2010 which outlawed age discrimination at work. This law change is something Labour can be truly proud of as is seriously tackled ageism in the workplace. It is disappointing then, that Labour would force peers to retire at 80.

Many Lords over the age of 80 make important contributions, are articulate, work hard and should not be removed due to the number of birthdays they’ve had. An example is Sally Greengross, who I mentioned in my recent Newsroom article. She delayed Chemotherapy so she could put forward amendments to the Domestic Abuse Act supporting older victim survivors of abuse. Labour Peer Lord Alf Dubs, is in his 90s and is a tireless campaigner for the rights of refugees and migrants. Dubs himself came to the UK as a Jewish refugee as a child during the Second World War. Are Labour really going to kick out people like Alf Dubs?

I would hope, a pragmatic solution can be found whereby those who remain active and want to stay members of the Lords can do so.

Life peerages is something that needs reviewing, especially for those who rarely contribute in the Lords. But discriminating against someone based on the number of birthdays they’ve had is not the way to do this.

Betting on the election date – how I lost a tenner

The beleaguered Conservative and Unionist Party faced another scandal during their ill-fated election campaign. This one is due to party officials close to Rishi Sunak placing bets on the election date the day before it was announced.

This alledged breach of gambling law by Conservative Candidates adds to the Tories woes. At a time when the public are increasngly distrustful of politicians, the optics of this are horrendous. Attempting to personally profit from information gained in their work. Such behaviour might be normal (though legally dubious) when working the financial markets, in politics it is clearly out of line.

The story was made worse after the Finacial Times published the following graphs, showing a spike in bets the day before the election was announced:

Such a scandal would not occur in New Zealand politics, where gambling on elections and politics is not allowed. On the one hand it is quite fun to see what the bookies odds are, however it does prevent this sort of nonsence happening.

I must confess to having my own election date wager, but this did not go my way. My local Labour Councillor Rosie Parry thought, and hoped, the general election would be called in May. I however was confident that the election would be called in November and made a £10 bet.

My rationale for this punt, the PM was polling terribly and would face certain defeat if he went to the country early. By November, he would have been in post two years, and maybe some of the external factors going against him might have improved, slightly. My mistake was overestimating Sunak’s ability to think strategically. Going early soley on the basis that the rate of inflation has fallen, ignoring the fact that everything is more expensive than three years ago, he would not be that witless. Surely? Alas, I was wrong.

Technically neither Rosie or I won this bet. Then again, seeing the back end of this wretched government will be victory enough for us both.

Sunak skips D-Day landing 80th anniversary

Prime Minister Rishi Sunak’s decision to to leave the 80th anniversary of the D-Day landing early, may become a defining moment of this General Election and of Sunak’s time as Prime Minister.

Why would a Prime Minister, whose party is behind in the polls 28 days from the General Election, do something so utterly stupid?

This morning, Rishi Sunak was forced to issue an apology for what his opponents have described as a dereliction of duty, unpatriotic and disrespectful towards those who fought and those who gave their lives in this battle.

Conservative MPs, already fearing political oblivion next month, were horrified when images from the D-Day anniversary showed former PM and Foreign Secretary David Cameron and not the current Prime Minister. One does not envy Conservative candidates having to defend this on the doorstep this coming weekend.

With just under a month to go until the General Election, any hope of a come-back like that achieved by John Major in the April 1992 election, looks highly unlikely. Instead, polls now suggest this could be the largest Tory defeat since 1906.