House of Lords Reform

It was assumed in the Times article, and by other commentators, that if Hailsham (or Home) was a candidate he would have to renounce his peerage.[93] This had been made possible for the first time by recent legislation.[n 8] The last British Prime Minister to sit in the House of Lords was The 3rd Marquess of Salisbury in 1902. By 1923, having to choose between Baldwin and Lord Curzon, George V decided that "the requirements of the present times" obliged him to appoint a Prime Minister from the Commons. His private secretary recorded that the King "believed he would not be fulfilling his trust were he now to make his selection of Prime Minister from the House of Lords".[96] Similarly, after the resignation of Neville Chamberlain in 1940 there were two likely successors, Churchill and Halifax, but the latter ruled himself out for the premiership on the grounds that his membership of the House of Lords disqualified him.[97] In 1963, therefore, it was well established that the Prime Minister should be a member of the House of Commons.[2] On 10 October Hailsham announced his intention to renounce his viscountcy.[98]

n8: If Macmillan had resigned a year earlier or a year later, neither Hailsham nor [Alec Douglas Home, 14th Earl of] Home could have been candidates for the succession. The Peerage Act became law in 1963 after a three-year campaign by Anthony Wedgwood Benn, who had reluctantly inherited his father's peerage in 1960.[94] Under this law existing peers had twelve months from 31 July 1963 in which they could disclaim their peerages.[95]

lol that they omit from this paragraph who exactly made all this possible = viscount stansgate, anthony wedgwood benn aka tony snoot

(also: i did NOT know this, but tony benn's older son stephen -- hilary's brother -- is the 3rd viscount stansgate lol)

lol lol lol

(also my scratch-card second house is still the best idea)

Benn succeeded to the title of Viscount Stansgate on the death of his father in March 2014, a title he officially accepted prompting speculation that he may take advantage of his entitlement to stand for election as a hereditary peer in the House of Lords upon the next hereditary vacancy.[3][4][5][6][7] His active acceptance of the title was recorded on 10 November 2014 with a note in the minutes of Proceedings from the House of Lords, stating:[8]

"The Lord Chancellor reported that Stephen Michael Wedgwood Benn had established his claim to the Viscount of Stansgate in the Peerage of the United Kingdom. The Clerk of the Parliaments was accordingly directed to enter Viscount Stansgate on the register of hereditary peers maintained under Standing Order 10(5)."

I didn't hear Salmond's verdict on that one. Would this have been serious enough to be another "birling in his grave" type incident?

i totally blame the parents

it's a tough life for these kids growing up on benefits with shit parents!

might start a TS Stafford Cripps vs Tony Benn poll. Not that I'm a Cripps expert, but I really enjoyed his appearances in the Maisky Dairies and other bits and bobs I've read.

Glad to hear this loved their early stuff

(xp) Cripps all the way, never liked Benn.

The hereditary peers thing in the House of Lords is insane. 92 places set aside for hereditary peers, almost all Tory or crossbench. When one dies, the remaining ones in his party get to vote on which hereditary peer should replace him. So when a Liberal Democrat peer died in 2016, the three remaining LD peers got to choose which hereditary peer should take his place. Election to parliament, only if you're a lord, and with a constituency of three. Democracy in action!