---

House of Lords Bill [HL]

My Lords, I realise that there is a high risk attached to making that point. I turn now to the question of composition. The Bill proposes that, "““not less than twenty per cent of the membership of the House of Lords shall consist of members who are independent of any registered political party””." That is defined by reference to activities undertaken during the two years prior to nomination for a peerage. I am sure that noble Lords will want to look at the details of the designation of independence, in particular the time limitation on the activities listed. What would happen if a Peer who qualified as independent at the time of nomination subsequently undertook one of more of the activities listed that would associate him with a political party? The question of composition will need to be looked at very carefully. The Bill provides that, "““the Government of the day shall be entitled to have a larger number of members than the official Opposition, but the Government majority over the Opposition shall normally be no greater than three per cent of the total membership of the House of Lords””." It is not clear from my reading of the Bill whether the Government’s majority should be over the official Opposition or the total opposition. If it is the case that it is to be a majority over the opposition, then initial work by my officials suggests that on the current composition of the House, an Appointments Commission would need to create 70 to 90 new Labour Peers. I have no doubt that my noble friend the Chief Whip would be very pleased about that. Further, the figures take no account of appointments from other political parties and of people who are independent of any party. There is a risk that far from reducing the size of your Lordships’ House, it would increase it, notwithstanding that Clause 8(5) provides that the commission should ““have regard”” to the need to reduce it from its current size.