House of Lords (Alternative Second Chamber) Bill [HL]

Baroness Finn Excerpts

2nd reading
Friday 23rd October 2026 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Finn (Con)]

My Lords, it is a pleasure to speak to this Bill, which has invited a broad debate on the future of your Lordships’ House. The noble Baroness, Lady Smith of Llanfaes, has a principled opposition to the House of Lords, and it is that principled conviction that underpins the Bill. We know how hard it is to make a case for reform in your Lordships’ House, as many noble Lords today have made clear, and I respect the noble Baroness sincerely for bringing this Bill forward. She will understand that we on these Benches cannot support the Bill, but we have had an opportunity today to reflect on what the House does well and where improvements may be made, and I welcome that opportunity. I will speak first on the Bill before reflecting on those broader questions.

We are concerned that the Bill does not set a clear direction. It requires a broad consultation that would set us on a magical mystery tour of all the options available as a replacement to the House of Lords as currently constituted. On our mystery tour, we would hear from Scottish Ministers, Welsh Ministers and the Northern Irish Ministers, but not the Assemblies, as the noble Viscount, Lord Stansgate, made clear. We would hear from local government and constitutional experts, whose theories are always illuminating. But is all that a truly good use of the precious time and resources of His Majesty’s Government, especially—as already pointed out by the noble Baroness, Lady Smith of Llanfaes, herself—given the number of previous reviews and commissions? I think not. As my noble friend Lord Jackson of Peterborough so presciently pointed out, there are many more pressing and urgent issues that concern the public. Indeed, it is rather strange that the devolved Governments would be consulted, but the Members of this House or the other place would not be. There is certainly scope for an amendment there when we proceed to Committee on the noble Baroness’s Bill.

In essence, the Bill asks us for a vote of no confidence in the current House of Lords without saying what an alternative Chamber should look like, as noble Lords including the noble Lord, Lord Blunkett, and my noble friend Lord Jackson pointed out. The noble Baroness might believe the House of Lords is not fit for purpose, but there is plenty of evidence to the contrary. It is rare that I invoke the former Prime Minister the right honourable Keir Starmer in support of an argument, but he illustrated the vitally important role of your Lordships’ House at Prime Minister’s Questions on 11 March. In an answer about the terminally ill adults Bill, he said:

“Scrutiny is a matter for the other place”.—[Official Report, Commons, 11/3/26; col. 326.]


For this place, your Lordships’ House, when Members of the other place are denied the opportunity to scrutinise legislation in full—whether that be a result of the guillotine or unacceptably late amendments tabled by the Government on Report—the work of this House becomes all the more important; again, that is an argument advanced by the noble Viscount, Lord Stansgate.

On the Employment Rights Bill, noble Lords from across the House united in common cause to hold the Government to account on the most damaging aspects of the Bill, securing a U-turn on day-one rights. That has saved businesses from an unmanageable burden, and I am very proud of my noble friends Lord Sharpe of Epsom and Lord Hunt of Wirral for bringing the Government to their senses by force of argument. I know they were grateful for the support of noble Lords on the Benches to my left and from so many noble Lords with extensive business expertise on the Cross Benches.

When we work together in this place, we really can hold the Government to account. That is our role within the constitutional settlement which we have inherited. I understand the noble Baroness, Lady Smith of Llanfaes, might find it dissatisfying that your Lordships’ House is not constituted in a way that one would design today. Nobody designing a modern constitution from scratch would conceive of such a Chamber playing this role. However—I have said this before, and I will say it again—through historic evolution it is no exaggeration to say that this House has become the best policy-revising Chamber in the world. In short, as the noble Baroness, Lady Taylor, so presciently said, it works. We benefit from the expertise of doctors and nurses, businessmen and women, field marshals, generals and reservists, journalists, barristers, solicitors and judges, trade unionists, charity executives, Permanent Secretaries, Bishops and farmers, ballerinas, a composer and an ornithologist. The House brings together some of the most accomplished and dedicated individuals, who apply their skills, insights and expertise to scrutinising legislation and holding the Executive to account.

The membership of your Lordships’ House is drawn from all backgrounds and walks of life. I grew up in Swansea—in fact, Wales is quite well represented in today’s debate—and my own background, like that of the noble Baronesses, Lady Smith of Llanfaes and Lady Taylor, and the noble Lord, Lord Blunkett, all of whom proudly talked about growing up on council estates, was also far from this House. The legitimacy of this House does not derive from democratic consent but from its ability to act as a positive constitutional force in lawmaking and government accountability. This legitimacy is grounded in the capabilities and dedication of its Members.

All constitutional reforms have profound and far-reaching consequences, whether intended or not. As a Conservative, I believe in continuity and change, but I am not naive. Of course noble Lords should always seek to improve the way we work, and of course we cannot stand still. During the Covid pandemic, we adapted to the challenges we faced. Equally, today we are trialling longer hours and earlier sittings in Grand Committee—not entirely welcomed unanimously, but it is right that we look to improve our practices where we can. The noble Viscount, Lord Stansgate, gave a number of examples, as did the noble Baroness, Lady Taylor of Bolton. I thank the noble Baroness, Lady Smith, for leading today’s debate so ably and I look forward to further discussion when we proceed to Committee.