• Created by: Q_
  • Created on: 31-03-19 11:31
View mindmap
  • Should the House of Lords be wholly elected?
    • NO
      • It would come into conflict with the House of Commons, as both Houses would claim democratic legitimacy.
      • Institutional conflict between two elected chambers with similar powers would produce legislative gridlock.
      • An appointed house would retain the expertise and independence of cross bench peers.
      • The problems associated with party control in the House of Commons would be duplicated in an elected upper house.
    • YES
      • A fully elected House of Lords would have the legitimacy that can only be derived from democratic elections.
      • It would be more confident in its work of scrutinising and amending bills, thus improving the quality of legislation.
      • If no party has a majority, it would challenge the dominance of the executive.
      • If elected by proportional representation, it would be more representative of the electorate.


No comments have yet been made

Similar Government & Politics resources:

See all Government & Politics resources »See all The state, nation and sovereignty resources »