wait. the house of lords is still unelected? I thought it had mostly become elected with some inherited left or such. You know never mind. I think imma go wikipedia this.
Edit: I remembered the appointment process a bit wrong, see ohulancutash’s reply
For the most part it is appointed. Each prime minister traditionally gives some people peerages at the end of their term, which entitles but does not require those people to sit in the House of Lords. On paper it’s the king that does it, but in practice it’s the PM. There are a few others like the last hereditary lords that this is about (they used to make up most of the House) and the lords spiritual (a couple dozen bishops from the church of England, who I would rather like to see get the same treatment as the hereditary peers)
Peerages are handed out annually on the advice of the PM, and there is a quota system to allow each party to be represented in the intake. The end of term appointments are personal to the PM, and are not part of the same system.
Ahh, there’s the danger of working off of memory without checking. That said, upon checking, it must be more than annually? If we take Blair as an example since he had a long tenure, it seems like he did a big chunk in June most (but not all) years but there are almost always at least a couple of other batches or individual appointments
Even if we include death, you can absolutely check the numbers and see that life peers are not replaced upon either retirement or death in any kind of timely manner. To use the years 2000 - 2006 as an example because that doesn’t require me to combine more tables than necessary from wikipedia, the stretch from the summer appointments in 2001 through to the summer of 2004 saw very few new appointments, and then throughout the second half of 2005 there was a substantial batch of appointments after the main summer one that was bigger than the retirements/deaths that had happened since the summer batch
I’m quite happy to be proven wrong here but it’d be nice if you can point to a source, because I can’t find one and everything I can find doesn’t support it
At certain times you can buy them by bribing the right people be awarded them in recognition of your very kind and generous donations to important projects.
wait. the house of lords is still unelected? I thought it had mostly become elected with some inherited left or such. You know never mind. I think imma go wikipedia this.
Edit: I remembered the appointment process a bit wrong, see ohulancutash’s reply
For the most part it is appointed. Each prime minister traditionally gives some people peerages at the end of their term, which entitles but does not require those people to sit in the House of Lords. On paper it’s the king that does it, but in practice it’s the PM. There are a few others like the last hereditary lords that this is about (they used to make up most of the House) and the lords spiritual (a couple dozen bishops from the church of England, who I would rather like to see get the same treatment as the hereditary peers)
Peerages are handed out annually on the advice of the PM, and there is a quota system to allow each party to be represented in the intake. The end of term appointments are personal to the PM, and are not part of the same system.
Ahh, there’s the danger of working off of memory without checking. That said, upon checking, it must be more than annually? If we take Blair as an example since he had a long tenure, it seems like he did a big chunk in June most (but not all) years but there are almost always at least a couple of other batches or individual appointments
If a Lord retires from the house they need to be replaced
That surely can’t be right, there was no way for a life peer to retire until quite recently (and after Blair’s tenure)
They weren’t immortal you know.
Even if we include death, you can absolutely check the numbers and see that life peers are not replaced upon either retirement or death in any kind of timely manner. To use the years 2000 - 2006 as an example because that doesn’t require me to combine more tables than necessary from wikipedia, the stretch from the summer appointments in 2001 through to the summer of 2004 saw very few new appointments, and then throughout the second half of 2005 there was a substantial batch of appointments after the main summer one that was bigger than the retirements/deaths that had happened since the summer batch
I’m quite happy to be proven wrong here but it’d be nice if you can point to a source, because I can’t find one and everything I can find doesn’t support it
At certain times you can
buy them by bribing the right peoplebe awarded them in recognition of your very kind and generous donations to important projects.