The House Of Lords And Contemporary Politics 1911 1957

This book brings together a substantial and representative selection of recent writings on the House of Lords from the accession of James I to the Parliament Act of 1911. The editors provide a general historiographical survey and a bibliography of recent writings on the House of Lords during the period.

House of Lords reform is often characterised as unfinished business: a riddle that has been left unanswered since 1911. But rarely can an unanswered riddle have had so many answers offered, even though few have been accepted; indeed, when Viscount Cave was invited in the mid-1920s to lead a Cabinet committee on Lords reform, he complained of finding 'the ground covered by an embarrassing mass of proposals'.That embarrassing mass increased throughout the twentieth century. Much ink has been spilled on what should be done with the upper House of Parliament; much less ink has been expended on why reform has been so difficult to achieve. This book analyses in detail the principal attempts to reform the House of Lords. Starting with the Parliament Act of 1911 the book examines the century of non-reform that followed, drawing upon substantial archival sources, many of which have been under-utilised until now. These sources challenge many of the existing understandings of the history of House of Lords reform and the reasons for success or failure of reform attempts. The book begins by arguing against the popular idea that the 1911 Act was intended by its supporters to be a temporary measure. 'No one – peers included – should be allowed to pronounce about the future of the House of Lords without reading Chris Ballinger's authoritative, shrewd and readable account about reform attempts over the past century. He punctures several widely-held myths and claims in the current debate.' Rt Hon Peter Riddell CBE Director, Institute for Government and former Hansard Society chair 'This is at once an impeccably researched academic study, and a thoroughly readable account loaded with lessons for today's would-be Lords reformers.' Lord (David) Lipsey

Examines the debates and developments about House of Lords reform since 1911, and notes that disagreements have occurred within, as well as between, the main political parties and governments throughout this time. It draws attention to how various proposals for reform have raised a wider range constitutional and political problems.

Painting a detailed portrait of the House of Lords since reform removed most hereditary members in 1999, this book demonstrates the chamber's newly diverse membership and substantial policy impact in British politics. It also places the Lords in a comparative context, asks if it can be considered 'legitimate', and examines the likelihood of reform.

This book is the most comprehensive single volume reference work available for British political facts. Covering the period from 1900 to the present, it is the latest edition in a series previously edited by David Butler and various collaborators. This new edition updates the contents to the immediate post-European Union referendum period in the UK. It is useful to a wide range of potential readers, including students, educators, journalists, policy professionals, and anyone with an interest in politics and political history. It will be valuable to academics working in a variety of disciplines, including history and political science.

This study of ideological politics in Victorian and Edwardian England centers on a referendal theory promoted by the great Lord Salisbury when he opposed William Gladstone's Liberal gov'ts. It was subsequently carried forward in the form of the referendum by Salisbury's son-in-law and ideological heir, the second Lord Selborne. Salisbury is today recognized as the most successful electorally of Conservative leaders. Selborne, though not as well known to historians, had a high contemporary reputation as an imperial proconsul who had united S. Africa. According to the referendal theory, the House of Lords had a duty to refer disputed legislation to the electorate when the House of Commons, in the lords' judgment, lacked a mandate for the measure in question. That is, the lords' political barometer was not the commons, as Gladstone contended, but the nat. at large. If this proposition prevailed, the lords could freely exercise an independent legislative veto in an age of expanding democracy. Not until the Liberals passed the Parliament Act (1911) were they able to counter the theory effectively. But well before this, Selborne's advocacy of the referendum was challenged by another Conservative leader, Lord Curzon, who had served for a decade as viceroy of India. Their rivalry is one of this study's most provocative and illuminating themes.