This political crisis could have been averted if the Government paid more heed to the Lords
4 min read
The House of Lords adds great value to our Parliamentary and should have been allowed to play a more constructive role in Brexit debates, writes Lord Cormack
If only more notice had been taken of debates and divisions in the House of Lords we would not be in a greater state of domestic political confusion than at any time in the last century and more. As he has now admitted, David Cameron did not either time – or handle – the referendum as well as he should have done. From his stepping down abruptly after June 23rd 2016 to the present we have seen the clear but narrow result followed by ever deepening divisions and dissentions in Parliament and the country. Parties, communities, even families, have been divided. Friendships have dissolved in bitterness and there has been an instinctive refusal, on the parts of the extremists on both sides, to contemplate compromise.
Even in the House of Lords there have been those who have felt unable to accept the result of the referendum, and zealots of the ERG for whom nothing but a no deal Brexit will suffice. But the vast majority of those in the Lords who voted Remain – and were bitterly disappointed in the result – have shown a more realistic recognition (perhaps because we are an unelected House) that what was decided in June 2016 must come to pass. Coupled with this is the recognition that an untidy exit without an agreement would cause incalculable harm both in the UK and in the European Union – harm that could include the disintegration of the United Kingdom, the most successful union in the history of Europe.
That is why Remainers both on the Tory benches and on the cross benches would, by a considerable majority, have accepted Theresa May’s deal. Of course it was not perfect, no compromise ever is. It is impossible ever to retain all the benefits of membership of an organisation one is leaving. It was because of the near solid vote of Labour MPs in the Commons, supported by the ERG, the Lib Dems and the SNP that we never had the chance to debate and vote on the deal in the Lords.
All this illustrates both the value and limitations of the upper House. The great value is that we are more able to look at issues on their merits and in the longer term. The limits are that we can never overturn or, in pre-eminent matters, take a lead. For everything controversial comes to us from the Commons. If they do not send it to us we cannot endorse it. As the unelected chamber we have, rightly, to acknowledge the supremacy of the elected chamber which is inevitably far more political in its composition. But, if we reflect for a moment, we have to acknowledge that the problems of the last three years would have been magnified out of all proportion if we had two elected, but opposed, Houses gridlocked in American fashion.
No elected system, however cleverly devised, would produce a House of Lords similar to the one which, I believe, compliments the Commons and adds great value to our Parliamentary system. Since the reforms of 1999 no party can command an overall majority in the Lords and the 20% of Crossbenchers – who bring an amazing variety of experience and expertise to our debates – impart something to our Parliamentary system which is not replicated in any other second chamber in the world.
Because of this I am very disappointed that we have not been able to play a sufficiently constructive part in the debates over Brexit. We should have had a Grand Committee of both Houses looking at the implications of our leaving. Indeed in the early summer of this year we passed a resolution to this effect – and it was completely ignored by the Government in the House of Commons.
Even with a no deal exit, years of negotiations lie ahead. For this is merely the beginning of years of discussions with the European Union. Is it not far better to conduct these on a foundation of amity and mutual respect rather than the on crumpled hopes that would be the basis if we leave in a disorderly manner without a basic deal? That is why the Lords have decisively supported the consistent majority in the Commons who want to make leaving without a deal impossible.
We must all wish the prime minister success in the next few weeks. But it would be no great achievement in statecraft to abandon all attempts to reach an agreement at a precise moment on a given date.
Lord Cormack is a Conservative peer and Life President of The House magazine
PoliticsHome Newsletters
Get the inside track on what MPs and Peers are talking about. Sign up to The House's morning email for the latest insight and reaction from Parliamentarians, policy-makers and organisations.
