DOCSLIB.ORG

House of Lords Official Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
House of Lords Official Report Vol. 783 Friday No. 24 8 September 2017 PARLIAMENTARYDEBATES (HANSARD) HOUSE OF LORDS OFFICIAL REPORT ORDEROFBUSINESS House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) (Abolition of By-Elections) Bill [HL] Second Reading.............................................................................................................2151 Age of Criminal Responsibility Bill [HL] Second Reading.............................................................................................................2186 Modern Slavery (Victim Support) Bill [HL] Second Reading.............................................................................................................2212 Hurricane Irma Private Notice Question................................................................................................2248 Lords wishing to be supplied with these Daily Reports should give notice to this effect to the Printed Paper Office. No proofs of Daily Reports are provided. Corrections for the bound volume which Lords wish to suggest to the report of their speeches should be clearly indicated in a copy of the Daily Report, which, with the column numbers concerned shown on the front cover, should be sent to the Editor of Debates, House of Lords, within 14 days of the date of the Daily Report. This issue of the Official Report is also available on the Internet at https://hansard.parliament.uk/lords/2017-09-08 The first time a Member speaks to a new piece of parliamentary business, the following abbreviations are used to show their party affiliation: Abbreviation Party/Group CB Cross Bench Con Conservative DUP Democratic Unionist Party GP Green Party Ind Lab Independent Labour Ind LD Independent Liberal Democrat Ind SD Independent Social Democrat Ind UU Independent Ulster Unionist Lab Labour LD Liberal Democrat LD Ind Liberal Democrat Independent Non-afl Non-affiliated PC Plaid Cymru UKIP UK Independence Party UUP Ulster Unionist Party No party affiliation is given for Members serving the House in a formal capacity, the Lords spiritual, Members on leave of absence or Members who are otherwise disqualified from sitting in the House. © Parliamentary Copyright House of Lords 2017, this publication may be reproduced under the terms of the Open Parliament licence, which is published at www.parliament.uk/site-information/copyright/. 2151 House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill[8 SEPTEMBER 2017] House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill 2152 House of Lords and the case for retaining them inexorably weaker—so much so that any neutral observer would surely conclude Friday 8 September 2017 that it is not so much a matter of whether the by-elections will cease, but when. 10 am The debates on the Bill last year, and the discussions Prayers—read by the Lord Bishop of Southwark. that surrounded them, have shown beyond doubt that there is overwhelming support in this House for the reform that I am proposing. Support has come from House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Labour, Liberal Democrats, Conservatives and Cross- (Abolition of By-Elections) Bill [HL] Benchers—including a very large number of hereditaries Second Reading themselves, who have come to me and, understandably, find it difficult to speak on this subject. I would love to 10.05 am know what the actual numbers were among the Moved by Lord Grocott hereditaries of those in favour and those against the change. When the opinion of the House was tested in That the Bill be now read a second time. Committee—of course, on a Friday, when Divisions are rare—the first vote on the principle of the Bill Lord Grocott (Lab): My Lords, just a year ago I resulted in a defeat for its opponents by a majority of introduced a Bill with exactly the same objective as the 93. There can be no reasonable doubt that the number one I am proposing today. Regrettably, despite very of Members of this House who are resolutely opposed strong support from all parts of the House, the Bill to this Bill is minuscule. was blocked in Committee by a small number of Peers. My motive in reintroducing the Bill is unchanged: The weakness of the Bill’s opponents could not be the by-election system, which provides for the better illustrated than by the tactics they employed in continuation—effectively in perpetuity—of a block of Committee. In the three months last year between 90 hereditary Peers is absurd and indefensible. In the Second Reading and Committee stage, just six 12 months since the last Bill, there have been significant amendments were tabled. Then, lo and behold, on the developments that make the case for scrapping the day before the debate, inspiration and creativity by-elections even more compelling. overwhelmed two Members of this House: the noble Let us remind ourselves briefly how the system Lord, Lord Trefgarne,and the noble Earl, Lord Caithness, works. There are 90 elected places. If a vacancy occurs tabled 50 amendments overnight. My Lords, we all among the 15 hereditary Peers who were originally know what that is about: a tiny number of Members officeholders—that is, Deputy Speakers—the electorate knowing they were in a hopeless minority in the House consist of all 803 Members of the House. The remaining and knowing that they could not win by votes so they 75 hereditaries are distributed among three party groups had better win by tricks. Fifty overnight amendments—if and the Cross-Benchers.The electorate for each by-election you are going to wreck a Bill, do it a bit more subtly. then consist of the hereditary Peers who are members This time, my appeal to anyone who is thinking of of the group where the vacancy has arisen. As a trying these tactics is to please think again. They do reminder, the numbers are as follows: for a Conservative neither noble Lords’ nor the House’s reputation any vacancy,48 hereditary Peers can vote; for a Cross-Bencher, good. They should win by the arguments and in the it is 30; for a Lib Dem, three; and for Labour, three. Division Lobbies, not by tricks. It is the opinion of the Try explaining that nonsense to members of the House that should prevail, not the opinion of one or public as a mechanism for recruiting people to serve in two of its Members. Parliament; I guarantee their jaws will hit the floor. It I also say to anyone who is thinking of wrecking the makes the d’Hondt system look simple, and given that Bill this time to please think of the adverse publicity the system is so manifestly absurd, is it any wonder for our House that that will attract. I will give three that it results in the most absurd by-elections? I cannot examples from the media since then: resist repeating the example I gave last year of a Lib “Hereditary Peers Set To Ambush Bill Aimed At Scrapping Dem by-election following the death of Eric Lubbock— Their ‘Laughable’ By-Elections”. the first person, I might add, who raised the issue of Another headline is: trying to scrap these by-elections. It was held in April “‘An embarrassment to our politics!’ Fury as Lords prepare to 2016, when the number of candidates was 11 and the elect new hereditary peer”. electorate was three. By way of comparison, before the Finally, we have: Great Reform Act 1832, even Old Sarum had an “Tory aristocrat joins Parliament for life by winning 143 votes electorate of seven. In comparison with the Lib Dem in a ‘Blackadder’ by-election”. by-election, that is a metropolis. I am the last person on the planet to argue that we I can hear Members asking: “But your Bill failed should change a good policy because of some bad last year, so why waste parliamentary time again?”. newspaper headlines, but it is noticeable that there is Noble Lords: Hear, hear! absolutely nobody, apart from a handful of people in this House, who is prepared to defend these by-elections. Lord Grocott: Well, I will give the answer—and I The argument for their continuation is friendless, hope that Members will give their answers during their and surely that is because simply there are no such speeches as well. Even in the 12 months since the last good arguments. Bill, there have been a number of developments, all of I challenge anyone today who is thinking of opposing which make the case for ending the by-elections stronger, my Bill to not give us a history lesson. Instead, come 2153 House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill[LORDS] House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill 2154 [LORD GROCOTT] “this House believes that its size should be reduced, and methods clean and explain to us, in 2017, what added value the should be explored by which this could be achieved.” by-elections provide to our parliamentary system. Tell As a result of that debate, the Lord Speaker established us precisely why we continue to replace the 90 hereditary a committee under the noble Lord, Lord Burns, to Peers. Tell us what the distinctive characteristics of the consider the issue. The committee is due to report in 198 people on the Register of Hereditary Peers are October. What has that to do, you may well ask, with that mean that we need to provide them with a reserved my Bill to end the by-elections? The answer is that if place in our legislature? Once elected, what is special we are to reduce the size of the Lords to around about their parliamentary talents that distinguishes 600 Members so that it is smaller than the Commons, them from other Members of the House? To make it surely we will have to amend the legislation that preserves personal, what is the justification for the heir of a in aspic 90 places for hereditary Peers. If we reduce the hereditary Peer in this House having a one in 200 chance size of this House without changing the law on the of becoming a member of the legislature while for hereditary bloc, the proportion of hereditaries would everyone else in the country, that chance is something rise from 11% to 15%.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 'Opposition-Craft': an Evaluative Framework for Official Opposition Parties in the United Kingdom Edward Henry Lack Submitte
    ‘Opposition-Craft’: An Evaluative Framework for Official Opposition Parties in the United Kingdom Edward Henry Lack Submitted in accordance with the requirements for the degree of PhD The University of Leeds, School of Politics and International Studies May, 2020 1 Intellectual Property and Publications Statements The candidate confirms that the work submitted is his own and that appropriate credit has been given where reference has been made to the work of others. This copy has been supplied on the understanding that it is copyright material and that no quotation from the thesis may be published without proper acknowledgement. ©2020 The University of Leeds and Edward Henry Lack The right of Edward Henry Lack to be identified as Author of this work has been asserted by him in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 2 Acknowledgements Page I would like to thank Dr Victoria Honeyman and Dr Timothy Heppell of the School of Politics and International Studies, The University of Leeds, for their support and guidance in the production of this work. I would also like to thank my partner, Dr Ben Ramm and my parents, David and Linden Lack, for their encouragement and belief in my efforts to undertake this project. Finally, I would like to acknowledge those who took part in the research for this PhD thesis: Lord David Steel, Lord David Owen, Lord Chris Smith, Lord Andrew Adonis, Lord David Blunkett and Dame Caroline Spelman. 3 Abstract This thesis offers a distinctive and innovative framework for the study of effective official opposition politics in the United Kingdom.
    [Show full text]
  • Issue 9 W Inter 2002 50P -- Seems to Have Been a Rather Sleepy Room Œ and Suggested It Might Be —Put in a Figure
    AP Society Newsletter '9 9Deliver this to SENH,-SE, Roger Aksakov, Montaigne and The ,9 ord The Anthony Powell Society I prithee post.an debonair 1ooks o French, 6er.an and Italian He is the handso.e upstairs lodger 4erse. Po ell also came across an Newsletter At No. 10 1runswick S2uareB autographed copy of Stendhal/s book on Italian Painting on the shelves in this Issue 9 W inter 2002 50p 77 seems to have been a rather sleepy room - and suggested it might be 9put in a figure. One of the Library Committee, closed case.B A Hero of Our Club œ Anthony the height, or depth, of the ,lit8, a Captain Aennedy appears to have been a Powell at The Travellers 1930- back oodsman lumbered across to the dedicated follo er of the Turf and pressed After all his hard ork in improving the 2000: Part Two Marshall/s solitary table. for the scarce Library funds to be applied Library, Po ell as a natural choice as to buying form7guides and 3ho‘s 3ho in Chairman of the Library Committee from 9Ah, Portal, there you are! I hear Racing. Then, in Covember 194D, 6arold :une 1949 on ards. In the autumn of The edited text of a talk delivered at the Royal Flying Corps have been Cicolson, Alan Pryce7:ones, LE :ones 1951 he presented a first edition copy of A The Travellers Club, 04 March 2002 doin‘ right ully well. Keep up the Eauthor of that evocative trilogy, A :uestion o -pbringing to the club Ehe good work!$ 4ictorian 1oyhood, Edwardian 5outh and had earlier presented some of his pre7 ar by Hugh Massingberd 6eorgian A ternoonF and a certain 9A2 novels, as ell as John Aubrey and His [Part One of this talk as published in the After the ar, The Travellers/ Library Po ellB ere brought in 9to ginger things Friends in 1949F and this coincided ith Autumn 2002 Newsletter] regarded by many, including :ohn upB, as Po ell ould have put it.
    [Show full text]
  • House of Lords Library Note: the Life Peerages Act 1958
    The Life Peerages Act 1958 This year sees the 50th anniversary of the passing of the Life Peerages Act 1958 on 30 April. The Act for the first time enabled life peerages, with a seat and vote in the House of Lords, to be granted for other than judicial purposes, and to both men and women. This Library Note describes the historical background to the Act and looks at its passage through both Houses of Parliament. It also considers the discussions in relation to the inclusion of women life peers in the House of Lords. Glenn Dymond 21st April 2008 LLN 2008/011 House of Lords Library Notes are compiled for the benefit of Members of Parliament and their personal staff. Authors are available to discuss the contents of the Notes with the Members and their staff but cannot advise members of the general public. Any comments on Library Notes should be sent to the Head of Research Services, House of Lords Library, London SW1A 0PW or emailed to [email protected]. Table of Contents 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1 2. Life peerages – an historical overview .......................................................................... 2 2.1 Hereditary nature of peerage................................................................................... 2 2.2 Women not summoned to Parliament ..................................................................... 2 2.3 Early life peerages..................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Standing Orders Proceedings of the House of Lords
    HOUSE OF LORDS COMPANION TO THE STANDING ORDERS AND GUIDE TO THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE HOUSE OF LORDS Laid before the House by the Clerk of the Parliaments 2007 PREFACE This is the 21st edition of the Companion to the Standing Orders of the House of Lords since Sir John Shaw-Lefevre, then Clerk of the Parliaments, compiled his first edition for private circulation in 1862. It is issued with the authority of the Procedure Committee. The House and its procedures have changed much in recent years, and continue to do so. This edition of the Companion reflects two particularly significant changes. First, on 4 July 2006 for the first time the House elected a Lord Speaker. Secondly, the Minutes of Proceedings have been replaced by the new publication House of Lords Business from the start of session 2006-07. The Companion is the authoritative guide to procedure, but it is by no means the only source of information for members. Others are the Handbook on facilities and services, booklets on participation in legislative business (from the Public Bill Office) and the General Guide to the Members’ Reimbursement Allowance Scheme (from the Finance Department). All such guidance is available on line. The Table Clerks and procedural offices are always available to advise members. PAUL HAYTER Clerk of the Parliaments i TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1: THE HOUSE AND ITS MEMBERSHIP ........................1 Composition of the House.......................................................................1 Disqualification for membership.............................................................1
    [Show full text]
  • Erskine May, Chapter V, Pp. 290-299 Life Peerages—The Wensleydale
    Next Contents Previous Erskine May, Chapter V, pp. 290-299 Life Peerages—The Wensleydale Case But all temporal peers,—whether English, Scottish, or Irish, and whether sitting by hereditary right or by election,—have been ennobled in blood, and transmit their dignities to their heirs. Hereditary descent has been the characteristic of the peerage, and—with the exception of the bishops—of the constitution of the House of Lords. The Law Lords In 1856, however, Her Majesty was advised to introduce among the hereditary peers of the realm, a new class of peers, created for life only. Well-founded complaints had been made of the manner in which the appelate jurisdiction of the House of Lords had been exercised. The highest court of appeal was often without judges, their place being filled by peers unlearned [291] in the law, who sat as members of the court, without affecting to participate in its judgments. This had been an evil of long standing; though it had not, until lately, aroused the vigilance of suitors and the public. For some years after the Revolution, there had not been a single law-lord in the House, Lord Somers having heard appeals as Lord Keeper. When that distinguished lawyer was at length admitted to a seat in the House of Peers, he was the only law-lord. During the greater part of the reigns of George II. and George III., appeals had been heard by Lord Hardwicke, Lord Mansfield, Lord Thurlow, and Lord Eldon, sitting in judicial solitude,—while two mute, unlearned lords were to be seen in the background, representing the collective wisdom of the court.
    [Show full text]
  • Liberator September 2020
    A shot of this would protect you 0 0 Illiberalism and identity politics - David Grace Radical 0 Does the Compass point to inter-party dealings - Simon Hebditch A pandemic of mental health problems - Claire Tyler liberalism Issue 405 - February 2021 £ 4 Issue 405 February 2021 Liberator is now free to read CONTENTS as a PDF on our website: www. liberatormagazine.org.uk and Commentary.............................................................................................3 please see inside for details of Radical Bulletin .........................................................................................4..7 how to sign up for notifications “YOU’RE ALL INDIVIDUALS” of when issues come out. “I’M NOT” ................................................................................................8..9 It’s Life of Brian’s most famous exchange, but identity politics is denying individuality See the website for the ‘sign up and will end up in aggressive nationalism, says David Grace to Liberator’s email newsletter’ NOT ALL THAT STUFF, AGAIN ...........................................................10..11 link. There is also a free archive Labour can’t win a majority and the Lib Dems and Greens can’t make much progress, of back issues to 2001. it’s time again for cross-party co-operation says Simon Hebditch MARCHING AWAY FROM THE SOUND OF GUNFIRE ..................12..13 The drift of the Liberal Democrats risks becoming terminal unless radical action is taken, to fight for people’s freedoms, writes Gareth Epps THE LIBERATOR THE PANDEMIC’S
    [Show full text]
  • Andrew Marr Show 15Th September 2019 Jo Swinson Am
    1 JO SWINSON ANDREW MARR SHOW 15TH SEPTEMBER 2019 JO SWINSON AM: Last night the former Tory leadership contender Sam Gyimah was the latest defector. His new party gathered this morning for their annual conference in Bournemouth under their new leader, Jo Swinson. I’ve been talking to her this morning, and I asked her first how many seats she thought the Lib Dems could win at the next election. JS: We’re going to fight at the next election for a Liberal Democrat majority government, and for me to be prime minister of this country. And I think that’s what our country needs. AM: So that means going from 18 seats now to more than 350 seats. That has never been done in the history of British politics. And even people who are very pro your party and look at the numbers talk about winning 100 seats, but you’re saying three times that. JS: There’s no limit to my ambition for the Liberal Democrats. Because there is no limit to my ambition for our country. We are in such dangerous times and we have an opportunity to change the course, but that does require the Liberal Democrats to make that leap, and that is what I am determined to build, the movement that will do that. AM: Let’s think about the millions upon millions of people who would have to vote Liberal Democrat for the first time in their lives to make this happen. If you become prime minister, or if you’re influential on the next government, your policy is now absolutely clear: no more referendums, no more ifs, no more buts, you revoke and that ends the entire Brexit debate and we stay inside the EU, period.
    [Show full text]
  • Planning for Accession and Coronation
    DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE INAUGURATING A NEW REIGN: PLANNING FOR ACCESSION AND CORONATION BOB MORRIS INAUGURATING A NEW REIGN: PLANNING FOR ACCESSION AND CORONATION Dr Bob Morris The Constitution Unit University College London May 2018 i ISBN: 978-1-903903-82-7 Published by: The Constitution Unit School of Public Policy University College London 29-31 Tavistock Square London WC1H 9QU United Kingdom Tel: 020 7679 4977 Email: [email protected] Web: www.ucl.ac.uk/constitution-unit © The Constitution Unit, UCL, 2018 This report is sold subject to the condition that it shall not, by way of trade or otherwise, be lent, hired out or otherwise circulated without the publisher’s prior consent in any form of binding or cover other than that in which it is published and without a similar condition including this condition being imposed on the subsequent purchaser. First published May 2018 Front cover image: Nathan Hughes Hamilton; licenced under Creative Commons, https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/legalcode ii CONTENTS Preface……………………………………………………………………………….v Executive summary………………………………………………………………….vi 1.1-1.25 Conceptual changes since 1952……………………………………………...1 1.1-1.5 Social…………………………………………………………..1 1.6-1.8 Religion……...………………………………………………....1 1.9-1.10 Political…………………………………………………….....2 1.11-1.14 Geopolitics and security……………………………………..2 1.15-1.23 Constitutional……………………………………………….3 1.24-1.25 Machinery of government…………………………………...5 2.1-2.22 Accession…………………………………………………………………....6 2.1 Demise…………………………………………………………….6 2.2-2.4
    [Show full text]
  • Huw Edwards Living with Our History
    the welsh + David Pountney Giving a Welsh voice to world stories Elen ap Robert Outside the box in Bangor Andrew Davies Tackling Sir Humphreys in the civil service Eluned Morgan Wales in the Lords Dafydd Wigley Turkeys don’t vote for Christmas Kevin Morgan Making the most of our purchasing power Michael Jones Continued growth in Welsh- medium primary schools Steve Dubé Huw Edwards Turbine blight in the hills Trevor Fishlock Filling the Dylan Thomas vacuum Living with Rhian Davies Mother of the more famous Ivor Peter Stead our history The man who came to Neath www.iwa.org.uk | Spring 2012 | No. 46 | £8.99 The Institute of Welsh Affairs gratefully acknowledges funding support from the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust, the Esmée Fairbairn Foundation and the Waterloo Foundation. The following organisations are corporate members: Public Sector • Swansea University • Rondo Media • Aberystwyth University • The Electoral Commission • RWE NPower Renewables • ACAS Wales • University of Glamorgan • S A Brain & Co • Bangor University • Wales Audit Office • Serco Ltd • BBC Cymru Wales • Waste & Resources Action Programme • Snowdonia Active • Bridgend College (WRAP) Cymru • The CAD Centre (UK) Ltd • British Waterways • The Co-Operative Cymru/Wales • Cardiff Council • Venture Wales • Cardiff Metropolitan Private Sector • Wales and West Utilities University Business School • ABACA Limited • Cardiff University • Arden Kitt Associates Ltd • Cardiff University (CAIRD) • Association of Chartered Certified Voluntary Sector • Cardiff University Library Accountants
    [Show full text]
  • Thesis Submitted in Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree 921AA Doctor of Philosophy in Government
    DE-MYSTIFYING INSTITUTIONAL CHANGE THE HOUSE OF LORDS IN TRANSITION Richard Reid A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree 921AA Doctor of Philosophy in Government University of Canberra Institute for Governance and Policy Analysis April 2016 Abstract This thesis evaluates the role of ideas in the reform of the House of Lords in the United Kingdom. A multi-dimensional theoretical approach has been devised which integrates Parsons’ (2003; 2002) concept of the cross-cutting idea, Hirschman’s (1991) reactionary theses, and Streeck and Thelen’s (2005) typology of gradual transformative change. This theoretical approach was applied to primary data gathered through semi-structured interviews conducted with a representative sample of 77 members of the House of Lords in late 2012 and early 2013. The data from these interviews has been supplemented, where necessary, with documentary analysis of secondary sources. Two key empirical findings emerge from the research. First, changes in the House of Lords in the period since 1997 have often been caused by factors other than direct legislation. For example the types of people appointed to the House of Lords since the election of the Blair government in 1997 have affected the culture and work of the Lords in significant ways. Second, the positions adopted by peers towards Lords’ reform are not as materially driven as has been claimed. This thesis provides evidence for the conclusion that ideas about British democracy and government, and the role of the House of Lords within the governance of Britain, are of central importance to the positions taken by peers; more important than their position within the House of Lords itself.
    [Show full text]
  • Hereditary Peers in the House of Lords Since 1999
    Library Note Hereditary Peers in the House of Lords Since 1999 The House of Lords Act 1999 ended the centuries-old linkage between the hereditary peerage and membership of the House of Lords. The majority of hereditary Peers left the House of Lords in November 1999, but under a compromise arrangement, 92 of their number, known as ‘excepted’ hereditary Peers still sit in the House today. Since the 1999 Act, there have been numerous proposals put forward for a second stage of major reform of the House of Lords, and for smaller incremental reforms which would end the practice of hereditary by-elections, but to date none of these has succeeded. This Note examines the role of hereditary Peers in the House of Lords since the 1999 Act. It begins by providing a very brief history of the hereditary principle in the House of Lords. It considers the passage of the 1999 Act through Parliament, and the impact it has had on both the composition and the behaviour of the House of Lords. It contains information about the elections and by-elections through which the excepted hereditary Peers have been chosen, as well as details of hereditary Peers who sit by virtue of a life peerage, female hereditary Peers in their own right and a statistical profile of hereditary members of the House today. The Note also outlines proposals for small and large scale reforms put forward by Labour, the current Government and in private members’ bills since 1999. Nicola Newson 26 March 2014 LLN 2014/014 House of Lords Library Notes are compiled for the benefit of Members of the House of Lords and their personal staff, to provide impartial, politically balanced briefing on subjects likely to be of interest to Members of the Lords.
    [Show full text]
  • Amend the Law Regarding Succession to Peerages and Baronetcies And
    Hereditary Peerages and Baronetcies (Equality of Inheritance) Bill [HL] 1 A BILL TO Amend the law regarding succession to peerages and baronetcies and eligibility to stand for election as a hereditary member of the House of Lords; and for connected purposes. E IT ENACTED by the Queen’s most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present BParliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:— 1 Succession to hereditary peerages (1) A person to whom subsection (4) applies may petition Her Majesty to direct that the remainder of their peerage or baronetcy be modified so as to descend to the eldest child, irrespective of whether that child is male or female. (2) A petition may be presented to Her Majesty only if it is signed by the holder of 5 the title and the current heir to the title, if any. (3) Her Majesty may grant the prayer of such a petition and, if She so directs, the peerage concerned shall descend accordingly from that point onwards. (4) This subsection applies to any person who is the holder of a hereditary peerage or baronetcy whose remainder either— 10 (a) limits the descent of the title solely to male heirs, or (b) gives male heirs precedence over elder female siblings. 2 Hereditary peer by-elections Standing Orders of the House of Lords shall make provision that in order to be eligible to stand for election under section 2 of the House of Lords Act 1999 a 15 peer must hold a peerage (other than a peerage of Ireland) which descends to the eldest child, irrespective of whether that child is male or female.
    [Show full text]