Too few words for Tory Lords
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.THE GOVERNMENT was yesterday accused of "political manipulation" of the House of Lords in a row over hereditary peers who face the axe under the planned shake-up.
Opposition peers' leader Lord Strathclyde hit out after reports that peers with inherited titles who hope to escape the reforms were to be allowed just 75 words to explain why they should remain in the Second Chamber.
The restriction has been agreed as part of a code of conduct for elections this autumn to choose which 92 hereditary peers should stay in the Lords for the time being.
The 75-word rule is intended to prevent peers bombarding each other with lengthy and expensive electoral addresses.
But the move has sparked a storm of protest, with some peers complaining that nothing sensible could be said in so few words, while others said it simply added to the farcical character of the elections.
Lord Mancroft, a Tory hereditary peer, said: "The whole thing is ludicrous. What do I include - my inside leg measurement?"
Lord Strathclyde called on the Government to postpone the elections, currently expected in late October or early November, until December, when the Royal Commission on Lords is due to present its conclusions.
"Wouldn't it be much better if the government waited for that report of the Royal Commission before going on with expelling about half the members of the House of Lords, those who are most independent?" said Lord Strathclyde."This is the first sign that we are witnessing the political manipulation of the second chamber."
Thomas Sutcliffe, Review front; Donald Macintyre, Review, page 3
Subscribe to Independent Premium to bookmark this article
Want to bookmark your favourite articles and stories to read or reference later? Start your Independent Premium subscription today.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments