High-profile campaigners, including former Labour cabinet minister Lord Chris Smith and broadcaster Sandi Toksvig, have intensified calls for radical reform of the House of Lords, labelling it as "unfit for purpose" in modern democracy.
The cross-party group, which also features anti-Brexit campaigner Gina Miller, argues that the unelected chamber undermines public trust in politics and requires urgent restructuring to reflect contemporary democratic values.
Growing Momentum for Change
The reform movement has gained significant traction following recent controversies surrounding Lords appointments and perceived conflicts of interest. Critics highlight how the current system allows political donors and party loyalists to secure lifetime peerages without public scrutiny.
"The House of Lords stands as a relic of bygone era," stated Lord Smith during a recent parliamentary debate. "When unelected individuals can shape legislation affecting millions, we must question whether this system serves the people or merely perpetuates privilege."
Key Demands for Reform
- Replacement of hereditary peers and bishops with elected representatives
- Strict term limits for appointed members
- Transparent criteria for political appointments
- Reduction in overall size of the chamber
- Measures to prevent conflicts of interest
Sandi Toksvig, co-founder of the Women's Equality Party, emphasised: "We cannot claim to be a modern democracy while maintaining an institution where seats are handed out as political favours. The public deserves better."
Political Reactions
The campaign has drawn mixed responses across the political spectrum. While some Conservative MPs dismiss it as "constitutional vandalism", backbench Labour and Liberal Democrat MPs have expressed support for meaningful reform.
Gina Miller warned: "Without substantial changes, the Lords risks becoming increasingly irrelevant. The status quo damages Britain's international reputation as a beacon of democracy."
As pressure mounts, Downing Street faces growing calls to address what many see as an embarrassing democratic deficit at the heart of British politics.
