Evaluate the view that when it comes to fulfilling their respective functions, the House of Lords can be seen as more successful than the House of Commons.

The House of Lords is more successful than the House of Commons in scrutinising legislation

The more independent and specialist House of Lords, especially since the Blair reforms, with more time for scrutiny, has become increasingly successful in their main role as a revising chamber

- Members recently inserted a new clause into the National Security Bill on foreign interference in elections. The new clause would require parties to publish statements identifying donations from foreigners.

- After more than 75 hours of scrutiny, the Illegal Migration Act became law in July 2023 with changes on time limits for detention of children and pregnant women

This makes it clear that Lords is more successful than the House of Commons in its key role as a revising chamber

HOWEVER, the Commons has the power to reject amendments from the Lords and it is more likely that pressure from backbenchers will trigger amendments to legislation

Ultimately whilst the Lords may add amendments, these can be rejected by the Commons (Dubs Amendment to Brexit Bill) and it is pressure from backbench MPs that normally encourages the government to propose and support amendments to its own legislation

- In 2020, the Commons rejected amendments to the Brexit Bill, namely the Dubs Amendment which would ensure refugee children would be reunited with family members in the UK. This was because of the 80-seat majority Johnson won via the FPTP the system.

- In April 2024 10 amendments were presented to the Commons about the Rwanda Bill, each which were turned down by the Conservatives

- In 2012, 91 Conservative backbenchers voted against coalition government plans for House of Lords reform

Now the Commons is at least as successful, if not more successful, than the Lords at scrutinising and amending legislation

The House of Lords is more successful in its legislative role of debating and voting against legislation

The Lords greater specialism and independence than the Commons, in addition to its ability to delay legislation by one year, means that the Lords is more able to challenge government (2019–21 session – 114 government defeats) and force reconsideration and compromise

- The Lords can delay legislation for a year, as they did for the 2008 Counter-Terrorism Bill, with 191 votes against the Bill, to Gordon Brown abandoning his parliamentary battle to allow police to detain suspects without charge for up to 42 days.

- As well as this, the Lords delayed the 2012 Welfare Reform Bill, with the government suffering 6 defeats as the Lords rejected the provision to charge single parents for the use of a child support agency

This means the Lords acts more successfully to challenge government legislation to force reconsideration and compromise on legislation

However, The Commons is more successful at debating and voting on legislation due to the different powers of the two Houses.

The Lords, due to its unelected nature, is constrained by the Salisbury Convention, Financial Privilege and the Parliament Acts, so only the Commons can veto legislation. The threat of exercising this power can force the government to withdraw or amend legislation (May and Brexit legislation, Cameron and House of Lords reform)

- In May 2024 the Commons reversed the Asylum Bill defeat by 21 votes, overriding the House of Lords' ruling

- In 2017 the Lords attempted to add amendments onto the passing of the Article 50 bill, which would guarantee EU citizens' rights for those already living in the UK. This was overturned by the Commons.

This suggests the Commons is at least as successful, if not more successful, than the Lords at debating and voting on legislation

The House of Lords, whilst unelected, plays a key role with its expertise and ability to represent issues that are important but not electorally popular

Many Peers represent their area of expertise – Peers to defend the rights and interests of groups such as prisoners and asylum seekers that are not necessarily electorally popular

- Peers debated the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 in June 2023, which focuses on issues like stalking and domestic abuse and homicide. With the vast amounts of human rights lawyers in the House of Lords, it is unsurprising issues like these are often raised.

- Baroness Tanni Grey-Thompson, an ex-Paralympian was crucial in proposing legislation which prevented coaches from having sexual relationships with any of their students under 18 - in 2017 she published the Duty of Care in Sport Report, many of the recommendations of which were put into legislation

- Lord Best is greatly concerned with affordable and accessible housing for those in need, with his latest speech being about the Renters (Reform) Bill in May 2024.

Therefore, the Lords is more successful than the Commons in representing a whole range of functional interests and the rights and interests of marginalised groups

HOWEVER, the representation function is far more successfully carried out by the Commons than the Lords.

The Lords, whilst providing some limited representation, is not elected whilst the elected Commons is with MPs playing the key role of representing their constituents’ interests

- Due to the House of Commons being elected by the public, they are more representative of the electorate. The House of Lords has only 3% BAME, versus the House of Commons 8%. The ethnic population is 13%, so therefore the Commons is more effective in representation.

- In 2000, for example, the Sexual Offences (Amendment) bill, which reduced the legal age for gay sex from 18 to 16, easily passed the House of Commons but was rejected by the House of Lords.

This suggests that the Commons is more successful than the Lords at fulfilling the representation function

Themes

- Scrutiny

- Debate

- Representation