The House of Lords performs some important functions in government and does not require radical reform.’ Discuss

While the House of Lords does have many issues pertaining to it, it does play a role in British politics and often does give valuable contributes to the system. One example of this would be the vital check it plays on the government, there is never a majority in the Lords, instead there are many crossbenchers, or independents, who tend to decide the outcome of a vote, because of this it means that, unlike the commons, no one party can dominate the lords and force legislation through, they must rely on either the support of enough crossbenchers, or support of the other parties.

There are issues with the  house of lords though. It is an unelected chamber, lacking the legitimacy of the Lower House, this prevents it from having many of the powers that the commons have. Some may argue that this prevents the lords from having any useful role in our political system, since they can not be given power without having elected legitimacy and a mandate from the people, their role in the system is from an undemocratic and outdated age.

Although the Lords can no longer outright block legislation, they can use the power of delay to make the government think again, and/or allow for more debate on the issue. This is a very powerful feature of the lords, and while some would say that in the hands of an unelected house it is undemocratic, the lords have a good track record with delaying legislation so far; for example the proposal to cut tax credits, which if applied would leave thousands of families impoverished, was delayed by the lords and as a result the Chancellor revised the legislation, there is also the fact that, if a statute is passed in the commons twice, it becomes law regardless of whether it gets the approval of the House of Lords.

Another issue with the house of lords as it is, is the involvement of the Lord Spiritual. These are Archbishops or major Bishops from the church of england who also act in the capacity of a Lord. This is direct involvement of the church with the state and should not occur, this is because in modern society the Church represents a strata of people, not the majority. Not everyone is an anglican now, so why should the Church of England have a say in the running of the Country but not the Catholic Church, or Islam, or Judaism? This element of the lords is one that provides no useful role in the political system and should be abolished.

The Lords themselves bring a wealth of knowledge to the political table, because they have been selected for the work they do outside of Parliament, like Lord Sugar, a very successful buisnessman who brings a great amount of knowledge about the financial world. As such there is virtually always an expert on any matter being discussed, regardless of how obscure. This is beneficial because it allows expert opinions from a variety of sectors to come and apply their knowledge directly to political legislation. They don't act as advisors, they can actually propose their own amendments, and even legislation (private peers bills). This allows a group of highly skilled people who do not have the time or want to become a Member of the Commons, to get involved with the legislative process and provide that much needed expert opinion

Scrutiny The Lords also provide a valuable role in their scrutiny, they scrutinise a variety of documents coming from many many sources, particularly legislation from the European Union. This scrutiny is vital for government as it means that parliament can get an objective view this legislation and ensures that laws are compatible with eachother (eg: The European Convention on Human Rights and the Anti Terrorism legislation 2001). The house of commons simply does not have time to scrutinise in as much depth as the lords do, so it is when a statute goes through the lords is when it undergoes the real scrutiny.

In conclusion, the Lords does play an important role in British Politics, doing many things that the commons simply does not have time to do, and with their highly regarded experience from all walks of life, the lords have an ability to scrutinise legislation that the career politicians of the lower house could not hope to supply. If they do not agree with legislation , or it is particularly controversial they can delay legislation to allow more time to debate it and make the government think again. While they are admittedly an unelected body, i do not feel this should require abolition of the house, in fact it could be said that them being unelected actually provides benefits, and breaks down the barriers to political participation.