Evaluate the view that although the House of Lords has less power than the House of Commons, in
practice it exerts more influence on government decisions.
P1 The government is far more considerate of the Commons’ power.
The Commons have an electoral mandate, so legislation is more likely to win
government support.
Commons can defeat the government through a vote of no confidence, potentially
prompting the removal of a government whereas the Lords carry much weaker
threats.
The need for the government to appease the Commons has been seen where the
government has deferred important action to a vote in the Commons.
o Eg the decision to employ airstrikes in Syria was put to a vote in 2015.
o The European Union Referendum Act 2015 was put to the Commons to
authorise the Brexit referendum.
If government fears defeat in the commons they may withdraw or amend plans,
whereas the Lords’ opposition is much more easily ignored.
o 2015 Cameron’s shelved plans for relaxing the ban on hunting after the SNP
emphasised their strong opposition.
Similarly, the Commons may also be powerful enough to force a free vote or
suspend collective responsibility on a particularly contentious issue.
o 2013 Cameron issued a free vote allowing Labour MPs to push through
same sex marriage despite majority Conservative opposition.
o UK’s Withdrawal from the EU – Extension of Article 50 bill saw a free vote in
2019.
Overall, the government is both reliant on support in the Commons to achieve its
measures and at risk from strong and effective opposition in the Commons which a
party whip may not be able to control.
P2 In contrast, the Lords are far more heavily restricted in their ability to influence
government or legislation.
The Lords face a number of formal barriers – the Parliament Acts bar the Lords
from delaying bills for more than a year, which the Commons may still choose to
reintroduce in the following session and pass without the Lords’ consent anyway.
o Parliament Act used to force through the Hunting Act which banned
hunting with dogs (2004).
o In 2017, the Lords attempted to amend Article 50 to ensure protections for
EU citizens living in the UK, however this was overturned by the Commons.
Therefore, the Lords can be easily be overpowered in disputes with the Commons.
There are many informal restrictions on the Lords’ ability to argue with the
government as a result of its democratic deficit.
The lords will often drop its opposition to a point before the government utilises
the Parliament Acts.
The Salisbury Convention prevents the Lords from opposing measures promised in
the manifesto of a winning party – the Lords could not legitimately oppose the will
of the public.
P4 The importance and effectiveness of these restrictions may change with time.
The Salisbury Convention may fluctuate in use depending on the perception of the
current government’s legitimacy.
o When a government has a strong mandate and clear majority, the Lords will
practice it exerts more influence on government decisions.
P1 The government is far more considerate of the Commons’ power.
The Commons have an electoral mandate, so legislation is more likely to win
government support.
Commons can defeat the government through a vote of no confidence, potentially
prompting the removal of a government whereas the Lords carry much weaker
threats.
The need for the government to appease the Commons has been seen where the
government has deferred important action to a vote in the Commons.
o Eg the decision to employ airstrikes in Syria was put to a vote in 2015.
o The European Union Referendum Act 2015 was put to the Commons to
authorise the Brexit referendum.
If government fears defeat in the commons they may withdraw or amend plans,
whereas the Lords’ opposition is much more easily ignored.
o 2015 Cameron’s shelved plans for relaxing the ban on hunting after the SNP
emphasised their strong opposition.
Similarly, the Commons may also be powerful enough to force a free vote or
suspend collective responsibility on a particularly contentious issue.
o 2013 Cameron issued a free vote allowing Labour MPs to push through
same sex marriage despite majority Conservative opposition.
o UK’s Withdrawal from the EU – Extension of Article 50 bill saw a free vote in
2019.
Overall, the government is both reliant on support in the Commons to achieve its
measures and at risk from strong and effective opposition in the Commons which a
party whip may not be able to control.
P2 In contrast, the Lords are far more heavily restricted in their ability to influence
government or legislation.
The Lords face a number of formal barriers – the Parliament Acts bar the Lords
from delaying bills for more than a year, which the Commons may still choose to
reintroduce in the following session and pass without the Lords’ consent anyway.
o Parliament Act used to force through the Hunting Act which banned
hunting with dogs (2004).
o In 2017, the Lords attempted to amend Article 50 to ensure protections for
EU citizens living in the UK, however this was overturned by the Commons.
Therefore, the Lords can be easily be overpowered in disputes with the Commons.
There are many informal restrictions on the Lords’ ability to argue with the
government as a result of its democratic deficit.
The lords will often drop its opposition to a point before the government utilises
the Parliament Acts.
The Salisbury Convention prevents the Lords from opposing measures promised in
the manifesto of a winning party – the Lords could not legitimately oppose the will
of the public.
P4 The importance and effectiveness of these restrictions may change with time.
The Salisbury Convention may fluctuate in use depending on the perception of the
current government’s legitimacy.
o When a government has a strong mandate and clear majority, the Lords will
