his judicial functions have been transferred to the Pre-
sident of the Courts of England and Wales, an additional
title for the Lord Chief Justice, and the Lord Chancellor’s
former role as Speaker in the House of Lords has been
taken over by a Lord Speaker, elected for a five-year term
by Peers. The creation of the Supreme Court will be
considered in more detail in Chapter 3.
In July 2008 the government published a White Paper
setting out its proposals for a reformed second chamber.
In free parliamentary votes held in 2007, the Lords had
voted for a wholly appointed House, while the Commons
voted for a wholly or mainly (80 per cent) elected second
chamber. The White Paper is based on the Commons
votes and the outcome of subsequent cross-party talks.
The key proposals are:
■The creation of a second chamber with directly elected
members.
■The chamber might consist of 100 per cent elected
members or 80 per cent elected and 20 per cent
appointed members.
■Further consideration should be given to the voting
system: the options include first-past-the-post, altern-
ative vote, Single Transferable Vote or a list system.
■Members should serve a long term of office, e.g. a
single non-renewable term of 12–15 years.
■New members would be elected in thirds coinciding
with general elections.
■If there were an appointed element, appointments
would be made by an Appointments Commission,
which would seek applications and nominations.
Individuals would be appointed on the basis of their
ability, willingness and commitment to take part in
the full range of work. Church of England Bishops
and retired Law Lords (and in the future Supreme
Court judges) would continue to have seats if there
was an appointed element. The main purpose of
having an appointed element would be to ensure a
significant independent (Crossbench) element.
■There would be a transition period of three electoral
cycles during which the three new tranches of mem-
bers would be phased in.
■Members would receive a salary.
■The link between a peerage and a seat in Parliament
would be broken. Hereditary peers would no longer
have a right to sit and vote in Parliament. Peerages
would not be conferred on members of the second
chamber.
■The new chamber would be significantly smaller than
the current House of Lords.
■The new chamber would have the same powers as
the current House of Lords. The primacy of the Com-
mons in Parliament would be preserved although it is
recognised that an elected chamber is likely to be
more ‘assertive’.
■Although the government has not expressed a view
about what the second chamber should be called, it
notes a consensus for ‘Senate’ among members of the
Cross-Party Group.The history of the reform of the House of Lords since
1997 is set out in Fig 2.1.
Before leaving the subject of law making by Parliament,
note should be made of the changes brought about by
the devolution of the powers of the Westminster Parlia-
ment to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland since 1997.
The Scotland Act 1998 created the first Scottish Parliament
for almost 300 years. There are 129 Members of the
Scottish Parliament (MSPs) who are elected by propor-
tional representation every four years. The first elections
took place in May 1999. The Parliament has power to
pass legislation in all areas where it has ‘legislative com-
petence’, which include education, health, transport,
local government, the environment and non-statutory
Scottish law. Certain matters are reserved for the UK
Parliament: they include defence, the UK constitution,
foreign affairs and economic policy. The Parliament also
has the power to vary the basic rate of income tax in
Scotland by 3p in the pound.
The Government of Wales Act 1998 provided for the
establishment of a National Assembly for Wales. There
are 60 members of the Welsh Assembly, who are elected
every four years. Forty Assembly Members (AMs) are
elected on a first-past-the-post basis from constituencies
and 20 AMs from electoral regions drawn from party
regional lists. The first elections were held on 6 May 1999.
The 1998 Act provided for the transfer of the powers and
responsibilities from the Welsh Office to the Assembly.
Unlike the arrangements for devolution in Scotland, the
Government of Wales Act 1998 did not provide for a
separation of the legislature from the executive and the
Assembly was not empowered to pass primary legislation.
Following a review of the operation of devolution by the
Richard Commission in 2004, the government published
a White Paper (Better Governance for Wales) in 2005,
which proposed implementing a formal separation of
powers between the executive and legislature within the
Assembly; reforming the electoral arrangements; and
extending the legislative powers of the Assembly. ThePart 1Introduction to law