How Does Social Reform Affect The House Of Lords?

Further to the 1911 Act, there have been numerous reforms aimed at changing the composition of the House of Lords; however it can be argued that these efforts have been repeatedly hindered with the focus turned on restricting the powers of the House. One prime example being The Parliament Act 1949 [16] where the initial intention was to remove the hereditary succession and to further restrict the power of the House of Lords. There were various proposals including; no permanent majority for any one political party; no hereditary succession and the fact that women should be capable of being appointed Lords of Parliament. [17] However, talks broke down in April 1948 with the only changes to be implemented being the reduction on the number of sessions in which a Bill must be passed by the Commons, and reducing the period between the first Second Reading and final passing in the Commons from two years to one. [18] There was also the Salisbury Convention that allowed the Commons to pass anything in manifesto without Lords Veto due to the political makeup and direct conflict of both Houses.
Nevertheless, the early 20th century, had seen a slight change in attitude towards the composition of the House with the introduction of The Life of Peerages Act 1958 [19] ultimately; ‘...transforming the House of Lords.’ [20] The Act enabled the Crown to create peerages for life thus enabling both men and for the first time women to sit and vote in the House of Lords with their peerages expiring upon their death; [21] completely abolishing the right to succession of peerage that existed prior to the 1958 Act. It can be asserted that the appointment of both Life and Hereditary Peers, with a wide range of expertise, has allowed debates to be better informed.