How long will Labour Lords be allowed to deny Scotland’s democratic rights?
Anas Sarwar failed to win the constituency he stood in the Scottish Parliament elections earlier this year. Yet now he has a lifelong seat in Westminster. Scots can never, ever vote him out!
Even Anas Sarwar doesn’t think this is democratic!
"The House of Lords, in its current form, as an institution has no place in 21st-century politics. It is unacceptable, and has been for far too long, to have unelected representatives wielding such power." Anas Sarwar said this in 2022 - but he quickly changed his tune after being offered an ermine robe.
The Scottish Labour leader is not alone though - he is just the latest to join a long list of Labour hypocrites happy to put their principles to one side to grab a lifelong seat in Westminster.
Starmer was not able to stick to his democratic principles either
Former Prime Minister Keir Starmer said that he would not follow the template of stuffing more peers into Westminster - but he has just appointed 26 more members to the House of Lords as part of his final peerage and honours list, more than one per month for his term of office.
Before becoming Prime Minister, Keir Starmer argued against Prime Ministers using patronage to stuff the upper house with political allies, promising to fix Britain's "broken" political system. But the promise was soon forgotten when he had the power.
These Labour peers, members of the self-styled people’s party, are now part of an institution where more than half the members are unelected. Despite this, the Supreme Court ruled that sovereignty over Scotland’s future rests with Westminster, not Holyrood where a majority voted for a new independence referendum. Two thirds of Scots disagree - they want Scotland not Westminster to have the power to hold a referendum.
Another step on the road to independence
In 2022, a report from serial intervenor Gordon Brown warned that replacing the Lords with a Senate of the Nations and Regions was vital - if England really wanted to continue the union with Scotland over the long term.
Despite what vocal Unionists argue, England is really not that bothered about continuing the Union with Scotland, which is good news for Scottish independence supporters. Scots watching the gradual drift apart of the UK can be assured that if we did nothing but watch and wait, the UK is moving closer to break-up.
Of course we are not waiting. Tens of thousands of Scots are signing our petition demanding Scotland’s right to choose.
Scotland can do better than this decaying institution
The UK Supreme Court ruled in 2022 that the Scottish Parliament cannot lawfully hold an independence referendum, stating that sovereignty over the constitution lies with Westminster. How long will we be expected to accept that we should leave our future in the hands of an institution, more than half of whose members have no right to represent anyone other than themselves?
A democratic second chamber is a powerful tool and an independent Scotland should have a citizens’ chamber not the Lords.
In democracies, a second chamber can represent nations and regions, balancing the voices of the whole country rather than centralising power in one place.
In Canada, for example, the Senate allocates seats by province - Quebec holds 24 of 105 - ensuring its distinct national identity is directly represented in federal decision-making.
In Germany, the Bundesrat gives each of the 16 Länder (states) votes in national legislation
Switzerland’s upper house is called “The Council of States” and has 46 members. They are allocated to the country’s 20 cantons, who each choose how to elect their own representatives.
The US Senate has 100 members, two each for every state. The French Senate has 348 members, who are elected mostly by members of local councils across the country.
Even the Chinese Congress is more democratic
The only undemocratic parliamentary chamber in the world larger than the Lords is China’s National People’s Congress, with 2,980 members. The population of the UK is 67 million; the population of China is 1.4 billion.
The Chinese Congress is clearly non-democratic but at least its members serve for 5 years while Lords are for life and Congress members are drawn from every region of the country. When it comes to democracy, keeping up with China is setting the bar pretty low and the House of Lords doesn't even achieve that.
By contrast, the UK’s House of Lords provides no such balance. It is overwhelmingly dominated by London and the south of England. Even “Lords” and “Ladies” of Scottish origin don’t usually live here - scandal-hit underwear tycoon Michelle Mone for example has lived in Mayfair for many years.
Every one of the “Scottish” peers is a Unionist - although more than 50% of Scots support independence. Not one of them has any right to represent anyone other than themselves.
Seats are for sale
Seats in the House of Lords are widely acknowledged to be for sale - or as it is more coyly put - “linked to donations”.
Peter Cruddas was appointed to the House of Lords despite the fact he was judged unsuitable by the House of Lords’ own selection committee. That appointment came after a donation to the Conservative Party of £500,00.
We have no explanation as to why the Russian Evgeny Lebedev, bankrolled by his KGB father, holds a seat in the Lords.
Recent research by Transparency International UK exposed the scale of political patronage in the Lords. Between 2013 and 2023, 68 out of 284 new peers nominated by political parties were major donors, who collectively gave £58 million to party coffers. A dozen of these “super-donors” accounted for over £50 million of that total.
The report warns that, while selling peerages is supposed to be illegal, the link between donations and lifetime seats raises “valid concerns about the sale of peerages as rewards for substantial contributions.”
The Lords does not meet the EU standard of democracy
The Copenhagen Criteria, which set out the EU’s standards for democratic governance, state:
“Functional democratic governance requires that all citizens of the country should be able to participate, on an equal basis, in political decision-making at every level… This also requires free elections with a secret ballot.”
By that measure, a state partly ruled by hereditary peers, donors-for-seats, and political appointees-for-life would not qualify for re-entry even if they wanted to.
England can keep its House of “Lords”. Every nation in these islands should be an independent and complete nation. Each should decide upon their own institutions - institutions that suit them and promote their nation's well-being.
It will be an opportunity, for Scotland at least, to move on from outdated institutions that hail from a feudal past and build new ones that are democratic and that the people choose.
