Reform Hypocrisy

House of Lords reform has thankfully hit the rocks this week. Some reform is required, of course: woefully outdated hereditary peerages do indeed need to be abolished; Lords who do not turn up to work on a frequent basis should have their title stripped; and as far as I’m concerned all new members should now be appointed by the independent House of Lords Commission in order to avoid party political cronyism which has plagued the House in the past. But the reforms that have recently been suggested went too far: electing most members will all but eradicate any Lords being appointed due to expertise, and vitally important cross-benchers will be diminished; the frequent petty bickering of the Commons may quickly edge itself into the Lords as the two houses would become more similar; and the bishops (even though reduced in number) will still have too much influence - I mean they can’t even agree on equal employment opportunities for women! So before reforms are implemented that would apparently ‘democratise’ the House of Lords, perhaps it is the House of Commons that actually requires modernisation in order to bring it more in line with most other workplaces in society. Therefore, here are my three suggestions for the Commons: 1. M.P.s are only allowed 28 days holiday per year (including bank holidays), and each holiday has to be authorised to ensure that there aren’t too many other Members holidaying at the same time; 2. Absence through sickness for more than a week requires a doctor’s note if wages are to be paid, and frequent absence may result in a disciplinary hearing; and 3. Parliament may be forced to sit at weekends if the Speaker arbitrarily decides that it is necessary. Yes, those reforms would certainly give the country more of the feeling that we are all in it together!