The Lords Spiritual

[Kermit power]

As of 5 years ago, only 14% of Britons declared themselves to be members of the Church of England, and I think we can all agree that this number is unlikely to have increased since?

Despite this, we still have 26 members of the House of Lords appointed purely because they are senior management in the Church of England.

Non believers don't have anyone specifically appointed to represent them, despite now being the largest group in the country. Muslims, Sikhs and Hindus are equally unrepresented.

Catholics? Don't be silly! Baptists or Methodists? Nope!

Not even the Welsh, Scottish or Northern Irish Anglicans get a look in!

That one tiny minority of 14% of the population get 26 Lords Spiritual all to themselves just because they happen to be members of a small subset of one religion created with the sole.purpose of giving Henry VIII a loophole to land himself a new missus, and somehow we're supposed to all pretend that the House of Lords has even the slightest scrap of credibility as part of a supposed 21st century democracy?

Why do we still put up with this?

[DanL]

There are currently over 700 members of the House of Lords, or so Wikipedia tells me. As a percentage of believers, the 20-something lords spiritual are probably a lower percentage of the House of Lords than the general population who attend church.

But that’s not really the point - if the House of Lords is reformed, what do you replace it with? A second elected house, maybe elected by proportional representation, or something else?

The bishops aren’t particularly a problem in my view - you either object to the whole concept, or you accept it as it is, bishops and all…

[Kermit power]

DanL said:

There are currently over 700 members of the House of Lords, or so Wikipedia tells me. As a percentage of believers, the 20-something lords spiritual are probably a lower percentage of the House of Lords than the general population who attend church.

But that’s not really the point - if the House of Lords is reformed, what do you replace it with? A second elected house, maybe elected by proportional representation, or something else?

The bishops aren’t particularly a problem in my view - you either object to the whole concept, or you accept it as it is, bishops and all…

Whether or not they are proportionate to the percentage of the population that belongs to their church would be relevant if every other religion in the country had equal representation, but as they are the only church with any representation by automatic right, I really don't see that it is.

As for objecting to it all or accepting it all, why? Either remove the Lords Spiritual or extend them to be proportionate for all beliefs (including Humanism) and I'd not particularly have a complaint with the Lords as it is. I certainly think that PR for the Commons is a far more pressing need, but the Lords Spiritual really do rankle!

[mwstewart]

Out of interest, what's a church member? How are they counted?

[Kermit power]

mwstewart said:

Out of interest, what's a church member? How are they counted?

In this instance, people who declared themselves as such to the British Social Attitudes survey, which is, I believe, generally well respected.

Interestingly, it also found that only 21% of that 14% - so less than 3% of the total population - actually attend a church service even once a month!

[Rivenink]

Reform the Commons with PR so that the primary legislature fairly reflects the actual political views of the nation.

Reform the Lords to include appointed experts in various fields of science, arts and industry, as well as elected representatives of local areas who can replace the role MP's have in providing a conduit to Government for people, as well as ensure local issues get aired in Parliament.

200 appointed, 400 local representatives for the Lords might be a good split?

[rodericb]

26 out of 784 are from the Church of England. Yep, huge influence in things there. And, Church of England. England. The Church of.... The clue is in the name..... How are the Lords Spiritual bringing down society exactly?

[DanL]

Kermit power said:

DanL said:

There are currently over 700 members of the House of Lords, or so Wikipedia tells me. As a percentage of believers, the 20-something lords spiritual are probably a lower percentage of the House of Lords than the general population who attend church.

But that’s not really the point - if the House of Lords is reformed, what do you replace it with? A second elected house, maybe elected by proportional representation, or something else?

The bishops aren’t particularly a problem in my view - you either object to the whole concept, or you accept it as it is, bishops and all…

Whether or not they are proportionate to the percentage of the population that belongs to their church would be relevant if every other religion in the country had equal representation, but as they are the only church with any representation by automatic right, I really don't see that it is.

As for objecting to it all or accepting it all, why? Either remove the Lords Spiritual or extend them to be proportionate for all beliefs (including Humanism) and I'd not particularly have a complaint with the Lords as it is. I certainly think that PR for the Commons is a far more pressing need, but the Lords Spiritual really do rankle!

The whole thing is anachronistic, so the 3% or so of the House of Lords that happen to be bishops doesn’t particularly concern me… If we’re talking about changing the makeup of the lords, change it all.

[Biker 1]

I live near an affluent village, population c. 5,500. Occasionally I drive past the CofE church on a Sunday morning, which has seating for several hundred. I have not seen more than 10 to 15 people either coming or going, most quite elderly.
The 3% figure mentioned above seems extremely optimistic.

[Kermit power]

rodericb said:

26 out of 784 are from the Church of England. Yep, huge influence in things there. And, Church of England. England. The Church of.... The clue is in the name..... How are the Lords Spiritual bringing down society exactly?

Precisely! England! And Church!

The very small number of people - not even 3% of the population go to a Church of England service even once a month, remember - for nothing more than historical reasons get granted their own special representatives in the upper chamber of the parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland!

There is absolutely no justification whatsoever for members of a minority religion (which all religions now are) from just one of the four constituent nations of our country to receive special treatment, and whether those representatives have any real power is secondary to the simple message that their continued existence sends.

[JuanCarlosFandango]

Rivenink said:

Reform the Commons with PR so that the primary legislature fairly reflects the actual political views of the nation.

Reform the Lords to include appointed experts in various fields of science, arts and industry, as well as elected representatives of local areas who can replace the role MP's have in providing a conduit to Government for people, as well as ensure local issues get aired in Parliament.

200 appointed, 400 local representatives for the Lords might be a good split?

I think that would put a fault line there between elected members who would see themselves as more legitimate, and appointed members who would feel they were hampered by the political machinations and short termism of elected colleagues.

I'm also dubious of "experts" as appointed by politicians. More corruption and vested interests.


The 26 Lords Spiritual are about 3.5% of the total number of Lords so well under the 14% who identify as C of E. Vesides the C of E doesn't really stand for anything remotely religious anyway so I'm not going to lose sleep over these lot.


My suggestion would be to keep the Commons as is and have the Lords elected by PR to be a proper revising chamber with a wide range of representatives, probably elected