By criticizing Labour’s plan to replace the House of Lords with an elected upper house, Sir Lindsay Hoyle has put himself on a collision course with the party.
The Speaker of the House of Commons asserted that the introduction of a second group of elected lawmakers at Westminster would result in a “power struggle.”
He also praised the current composition of the Lords, which consists of 780 appointed peers, as being ‘very valuable’ to the Commons.
Sir Lindsay was a Labour member of parliament previous to assuming the position of Speaker.
His public disagreement with one of Labour’s signature initiatives may raise eyebrows, given he is required to maintain political neutrality in the House of Commons.
When Sir Lindsay steps down as Speaker, he will likely be offered a seat in the House of Lords, as is customary according to contemporary practice.
Last month, as part of a 40-point plan to’renew democracy’ in Britain, Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer outlined how his party would ‘throw out the indefensible House of Lords.’
Sir Keir has pledged that if Labour wins the next election, they will replace the Lords with a “smaller, more representative, and democratic second chamber.”
The Labour plan, drafted with the assistance of former prime minister Gordon Brown, also states that a new second chamber should ‘supplement’ the House of Commons and that MPs should retain ‘primacy.’
Sir Lindsay Hoyle argued that adding a second group of elected MPs to Westminster would result in a “power struggle.”
As part of a 40-point plan to’renew democracy’ in Britain, Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer outlined last month how his party would ‘throw out the indefensible House of Lords.
Sir Keir’s ideas, which were drafted with the assistance of former prime minister Gordon Brown, vowed that a new second chamber would ‘complement’ the House of Commons.
In an interview with Andrew Marr of LBC radio, Sir Lindsay attacked Labour’s ideas while defending the current operation of the Lords.
He stated, “From what we’ve observed, the second chamber has been extraordinarily beneficial to the House of Commons.”
“We have been refining the business, cleaning up the bills, and sending them back in proper form. Consequently, the second chamber has been extraordinarily valuable.
I believe and believe that we should not have an elected second house. I do not desire competition — who holds the upper hand?
Currently, it is abundantly evident that the Body of Commons, the elected house, has supremacy.
After the election of a second house, a power struggle ensues.
Sir Lindsay, who may have to oversee Labour’s policy agenda in the Commons if they win power and he remains as Speaker, cautioned against conflating the “different” powers of the two Houses of Parliament.
‘What I would say is that if people want to improve it, they should do so, but there should not be a second elected chamber,’ he continued.
We have no need for the competition. The Commons will continue to possess supremacy.
People recognize this as the most senior house. We do not want any fistfights.
“We want extremely obvious, distinct powers to be separated very, very easily and without election
»Lindsay Hoyle and Keir Starmer disagree on Labour’s proposal to replace the House of Lords«