Peers could be forced to resign if they do not attend House of Lords enough

Peers could be forced to resign if they do not contribute enough to the House of Lords, under reforms ministers hope to make.

Baroness Smith of Basildon, the Leader of the House of Lords, also suggested the Government is keen to press ahead with plans to place a retirement age of 80 upon peers.

Writing for The Telegraph, the Labour peer said the Government’s plans to abolish hereditary peers from Parliament’s upper chamber were “by no means the limit of the Government’s Lords reform ambitions”.

The House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill, which is undergoing its final stages of parliamentary scrutiny, will abolish the 92 seats reserved for members of the upper chamber who are there by right of birth.

There are currently 86 hereditary peers after the suspension of by-elections pending the legislation, the majority of whom – 44 – are Conservative.

The Bill delivers on a promise in Labour’s election manifesto and has been promoted as the first step in a process of reform.

In her Telegraph article, Lady Smith said the Government was now looking to progress further changes to the upper chamber.

“The introduction of a mandatory retirement age for peers and a participation requirement are both clear among our stage-two manifesto commitments,” she said.

The Lords Leader said debates on the current Bill have led her to believe that there is room for a “collaborative way forward”.

A select committee of cross-party peers will consider plans for a retirement age and a participation requirement, Lady Smith said.

She wrote: “Most peers agree the current membership is too high and that there are those who rarely attend. The committee will, in turn, be able to look at what might be done with or without legislation. I hope the select committee will also anticipate any unintended consequences.”

With plans to ensure peers retire at 80, the committee will meanwhile help to “avoid any possible cliff-edge moment”, she added.