The House of Lords is a relic from a bygone era

The argument

The House of Lords is described here as an archaic institution, and the charge is meant historically rather than as a general complaint about tradition. The chamber took its form in a period of British history when the country was ruled by an absolute monarchy and run by the land-owning gentry. In that arrangement an upper house composed of hereditary landholders was not anomalous; it reflected where power actually sat, and a chamber of peers was a reasonable representation of a society organised around landed property and royal authority. In the twenty-first century, on this argument, things could not be more different, and the changes have been systematic rather than cosmetic. The monarchy no longer holds absolute power. The franchise has been extended to the whole adult population, so political authority now derives from universal suffrage rather than from land or title. Power has been distributed geographically as well, with devolved assemblies and a devolved Parliament established in Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland. Within Parliament itself the balance has shifted decisively: the House of Commons is the supreme body directing policy, and the Lords has been relegated to an advisory chamber. That last change is what proponents regard as decisive, because it describes an institution already stripped of the function it was built to perform. Every source of legitimacy modern British politics recognises — election, popular mandate, devolved consent — is one the Lords does not possess, and the powers it retains are exercised by people no voter chose. As the United Kingdom has grown into a modern parliamentary democracy, the unelected upper house has come to look increasingly outmoded against it. Because the House of Lords is a relic from a bygone era in this sense, the argument concludes, it should be abolished.

Premises

Counter-arguments

The House of Lords continues to play an important role in revising and scrutinising legislation. The second chamber contains a number of experts who have a variety of experience and can recognise technical flaws in legislation. Without the distraction of regular elections or the increased work that comes with managing a constituency, peers have more time to devote to scrutinising and debating the Government's legislative program. The current political make-up of the Lords also means that the Government does not have a majority, making it in some senses the real opposition as it has the numbers to amend and defeat legislation, forcing the Government to rethink its approach.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P2] The House of Lords is not irrelevant - it performs an important role in keeping the legislature in check.