The House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill Explained

In the lead up to the general election, Labour Party committed to reforming the House of Lords. And, it seems that things are underway, with Starmer planning to get rid of the final 92 hereditary peers. In this video, we're going to explain why the hereditary peers are still in the Lords, how Starmer plans to get rid of them, and some of the arguments for and against the plan.

Our mission is to explain news and politics in an impartial, efficient, and accessible way, balancing import and interest while fostering independent thought.

TLDR is a completely independent & privately owned media company that's not afraid to tackle the issues we think are most important. The channel is run by a small group of young people, with us hoping to pass on our enthusiasm for politics to other young people. We are primarily fan sourced with most of our funding coming from donations and ad revenue. No shady corporations, no one telling us what to say. We can't wait to grow further and help more people get informed. Help support us by subscribing, engaging and sharing. Thanks!

[kevinhardman]

Could the house of Lords indefinitely stall the bill by repeatedly sending it back to the house of parliament with amendment recommendations that they won't agree to?

[rye-ry]

There is no point in having a house of lords if the members are just going to be political appointments.

[simontemplar]

Highly informative piece. Shame none of the national newspapers or the television companies are not running this piece every other week. If you want a conspiracy theory to blame for how sh1t the country is then you can blame our media for feeding us clickbait headlines without the background as explained in this video. Great job, this channel is a breath of fresh air.

[AstraDivinaa]

5:02 TLDR News doing a TF2 reference is insane

[SirWhig-esq.]

Debates in the HoL are far more interesting than the ones in the commons. Unfortunately no one really watches them because of the nature of the unelected upper house.

[hws]

I mean the house of lords wouldn't be as objectively bad if parties did not make people lord from cronyism, nepotism and for political ideology and allies

[blackroseangel]

Wait, so the 96 unelected lords, getting paid to do nothing, who only got the job because daddy said so. Are opposed to getting

Shocking

[chrissouthgate]

Reform of the House of Commons is far more urgent. The Hereditary Peers are mearly the low-hanging fruit. Of more concern should be the political appointees, some of whom (over recent decades) have been extremely dodgy, Lord Frost & David Cameron eventually spring to mind, carefully avoiding some of the really dubious choices made.

[mymemeplex]

I missed the reason why there's only a couple Labour lords and so many more conservatives ?

[Mosern]

UK's "democracy" has quite a few interesting quirks to say the least.

[Alexander-ybzc]

My question is what reform is best for the house of lords ? If it goes to an elected house like the US senate then at best things function the way they are now at worst we get one party controlling the commons and another controlling the lords creating gridlock.

Maybe we should have the lords be kept unelected but have it made up of ex public officals and experts from their fields. Imagime having a body of experts including city planners, architect's, lawyers, contruction workers ect. All able to give sound advice on legislation passing the commons as to what is missing or if it will work.

[uplink-on-yt]

"Law passed by Lords with 92 votes against."

[xyloz]

I was NOT expecting a tf2 reference @ 5:02

[chandlerblachut]

I no longer feel bad about how weird American laws are

[hccup]

Peers should not be chosen by prime ministers. Should be selected by local governments/ councils

[JimBanksy]

The total cost of the House of Lords is around £120 million per year, covering a wide range of expenses including staffing, maintenance, and the daily allowances peers can claim for attendance, which are up to £323 per day​ However, hereditary peers, who make up about 11% of the House, account for a fraction of this. Over the last decade, based on this proportion, their share of the costs could be roughly estimated at £13 million annually, adding up to around £130 million over ten years.

This estimate includes attendance allowances, travel, and administration costs, but the exact figure isn't broken down publicly by the UK government.

[aegisofhonor]

I find it ironic that a Hereditary Lord of the House of Lords will call an act to abolish his posh position as "high handed".

[quintuscrinis]

Ironic that Labour are now pushing for Lord's reform given how aggressively they were against Lord's reform about a decade ago when the coalition (alright really the Lib Dema) were trying to make these sorts of reforms!!

[EJH_]

There is no argument for having people in your upper chamber who haven't been elected.

[alexvlkvkna]

AFAIK the Earl Marshal handles coronations and funerals of the royals, while the Lord Great Chamberlain used to be (still kinda is?) the property manager of the Palace of Westminster itself.

Feel free to correct me, if I got something wrong.