British Labour Party politicians may never admit it, but everyone likes the cachet of the prefix ‘Lord’ or ‘Lady’, though grander hereditary ones like Marquess, Duke and the like are out of reach of ordinary-born folks. Life peerages were instituted in 1958 during the Conservative government of Harold Macmillan (who accepted a hereditary peerage at the age of 90), ostensibly to diversify the House of Lords, but the fascination for lordly titles must have had a role too.

This bit of context is necessary because for the umpteenth time in recent history, the old issue of whether hereditary peers should be totally banished from the House of Lords has been resurrected with the return of a Labour government in Britain. As India took a cue from Britain when constituting its own upper house of Parliament but excluded the Chamber of Princes (Narendra Mandal) set up by George V in 1920, it may be time for Britain to look to India for inspiration.

At present, only 90 of the 829 peers in Britain’s House of Lords are hereditary, while two are ex-officio. The rest have been ‘elevated’ to the peerage for life by the main political parties although not all of them are professional politicians. From about 850 hereditary peers in 1952, the Life Peerages Act in 1958 ballooned it to a record 1,330 in 1999 till the House of Lords Act that year excised all but 90 of the hereditary ones, reducing the total to 669 by 2000, mostly life peers.

As every government, whether Labour or Conservative, has assiduously sought to elevate its own supporters to the Lords over the years, the total continues........

© News18