House of Lords Reform: What the Polls Show
61% of Britons want an elected upper chamber. Labour has removed the hereditary peers. But a fully democratic second chamber remains a long way off.
The State of the Lords in 2026
The House of Lords is the upper chamber of the UK Parliament. Unlike the elected House of Commons, its approximately 780 members are entirely unelected. They include life peers appointed by prime ministers (historically as political patronage), 26 bishops of the Church of England, and until 2024, 92 hereditary peers — members entitled to a seat purely by aristocratic inheritance.
The Labour government elected in 2024 passed legislation to remove the remaining 92 hereditary peers, fulfilling a long-standing Labour pledge. This was described as a “first step” in Lords reform, with longer-term changes — potentially including elected elements — under review by a government-appointed commission.
Despite the hereditary peer removal, the Lords remains one of the largest unelected legislative chambers in the world. The UK and Canada are the only major democracies with an entirely appointed upper house at national level.
Public polling (YouGov 2024–2026): 61% want an elected upper chamber. 18% want to keep an appointed Lords. 21% are unsure. Support for election is highest among 18-35 year-olds (71%) and Labour voters (70%).
Historical Context: 100 Years of Reform Attempts
Current Composition of the House of Lords (2026)
Source: UK Parliament, 2026. Figures approximate; crossbenchers are non-partisan.
Labour’s Reform Plans
Labour’s 2024 manifesto described Lords reform as a multi-stage process. Stage one — removal of hereditary peers — is complete. Stage two involves a Constitutional Reform Commission which is expected to report in 2026 with recommendations on future composition.
Key questions for the commission include:
- Should the upper chamber be fully elected, partially elected, or reformed-appointed?
- What powers should it have? (Currently the Lords can delay but not block most legislation.)
- What electoral system would be used if elections are introduced? (Most proposals suggest PR, to avoid replicating FPTP distortions.)
- What should happen to existing life peers? (Scrapping all appointments creates significant practical problems.)
- Should the 26 Church of England bishops retain automatic seats? (Polling shows 65% say no.)
want a fully or partially elected upper chamber
want to remove bishops’ automatic reserved seats
say the Lords should be smaller than its current 780 members
Arguments For and Against Lords Reform
Case For an Elected Lords
- Democratic legitimacy: unelected legislators are hard to defend
- Political patronage creates a perception of corruption
- 780 members is too large and inefficient
- Bishops’ reserved seats breach secular democratic norms
- An elected chamber could hold governments to account more effectively
- Most democracies manage with elected upper houses
Case Against Elected Lords
- A democratically elected Lords might clash with the Commons (gridlock)
- Would lose independent cross-bench expertise (scientists, lawyers, generals)
- Could become a political battleground like the US Senate
- Constitutional role would need to be renegotiated
- Reform could weaken the Lords’ willingness to revise legislation
- Transition would be enormously complex
Alternative Models: What an Elected Lords Could Look Like
Several concrete reform proposals have been advanced over the decades. The most detailed recent proposal came from the 2012 Joint Committee on Draft House of Lords Reform Bill, which recommended an 80% elected, 20% appointed chamber of 450 members using STV over three election cycles.
The Powers Question
Any elected Lords reform must address its powers. Currently, the Lords can delay non-money bills for up to one year. An elected chamber with democratic legitimacy might demand stronger powers — potentially creating gridlock with the Commons. Most reform proposals therefore propose limited powers similar to the current Lords but with stronger legitimacy to use them.
The German Bundesrat model — where regional governments send representatives to a second chamber — has been proposed for a UK context, potentially giving Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and English regions direct representation in Westminster legislation for the first time.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can the House of Lords block legislation?
The Lords can delay most legislation by up to one year (under the Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949), but cannot permanently block it if the Commons insists. They cannot block Money Bills at all. In practice, the Lords’ main role is revision and delay, not permanent veto. The so-called Salisbury Convention means the Lords does not block manifesto commitments of an elected government.
Who appoints life peers?
Life peers are appointed by the King on the advice of the Prime Minister. In practice, each party leader nominates peers in proportion to Commons representation, plus the PM can appoint independently. Critics argue this system has been abused by multiple prime ministers to reward donors and allies. The House of Lords Appointments Commission vets nominees for propriety but cannot reject political appointees.
How many Lords does the UK have compared to other countries?
The UK House of Lords with ~780 members is the second-largest legislative chamber in the world after the Chinese National People’s Congress. The US Senate has 100 members, the French Senate 348, the German Bundesrat 69, the Australian Senate 76. By any comparison, 780 is extremely large for a revising chamber.
What happened to the 2011 Lords Reform Bill?
Nick Clegg’s Lords Reform Bill of 2012 proposed an 80% elected, 20% appointed chamber of 450 members using STV proportional representation. It passed its second reading but was abandoned after 91 Conservative MPs voted against it in protest at the government’s AV referendum defeat. The failure of that bill has since informed discussions about how to sequence and frame future reform.