The statute also requires that the Lord Chancellor, the First Minister in Scotland, the First Minister in Wales, the
Judicial Appointments Commission in Northern Ireland and senior judges across the UK are consulted as part of the selection process.
In addition, Mr Straw said the
current appointments commission would be made a legal body and have a new duty to scrutinise political appointments not only for propriety but also for «suitability», to ensure the House of Lords was full of the right people.
It proposes allowing retirements from the Lords and calls for future appointments to be put on a «more transparent and sustainable basis, with the independent House of Lords
appointments commission determining how many vacancies exist».
Lord Jay of Ewelme, chair of the House of Lords
Appointments Commission until 2013, provided a preface, and argued at the launch that «we have to get the numbers down... so we do need a combination of discipline on appointments and encouragement to retire».
House of Lords
Appointments Commission Set up in May 2000, this independent, public body recommends individuals for appointment as non-party-political life peers and vets nominations for life peers to ensure the highest standards of propriety.
Former Solicitors Regulation Authority board member and Judicial
Appointments Commission member Sara Nathan OBE, who helped found the charity, said: «I don't know how Refugees At Home could ever have got started and flourished so quickly without the superb, pro bono help from the team at Travers Smith.»
Appointed long before the Judicial
Appointments Commission came into being, he recounts his tap on the shoulder moment, which came following a building dispute that had gone all the way to the House of Lords.
Other proposals include: appointing an independent layperson, instead of a judge, to head the selection panels for the lord chief justice and the president of the Supreme Court; transferring the lord chancellor's judicial appointment powers below either the High Court or the Court of Appeal to the lord chief justice; and restricting judicial
appointment commission involvement in selecting judicial office holders who do not require a legal qualification.
8 February 2007: The government publishes a new white paper that calls for an upper house composed of elected members and members appointed by a new
statutory appointments commission.
16 July 2003: Responding to the report by the joint committee on Lords reform, the government says that there is no consensus in parliament for introducing any elected element into the second chamber, only for removing the remaining 92 hereditary peers and establishing a new
independent appointments commission.
Nowadays, however, the upper house wields far less power than the lower, and the hereditary members are slowly being phased out, replaced by Lords appointed by the Prime Minister or the House of
Lords Appointments Commission, an independent body.
He even told
the appointments commission and I'm sure they blacklisted me.»
In addition, an independent
Appointments Commission would operate by creating a list of «experts» much as it already does.
In short, I propose that abstentions count as «votes» for
an Appointments Commission list.
«That is one of the reasons why we need
an Appointments Commission on a statutory basis with the powers to curb the unrestricted use of patronage that Prime Ministers currently enjoy.
Without the intervention of
the Appointments Commission, the damage might have been even worse.
«I pay tribute to the work of
the Appointments Commission and the thoroughness with which it interviews non-party nominees.
Michael Berkeley: Reinstating the power of
the appointments commission over all nominations for peerages could help restore respect
The House of Lords
Appointments Commission was established in 2000 to check the suitability of those nominated for an honour.
A small number of non-party peers are nominated by the independent House of Lords
Appointments Commission, while 26 Bishops and 87 hereditary peers make up the remainder.
The list was referred to
the Appointments Commission in the usual way.
On 5 October 2006 Lord Levy told Sir Gulam that he should not have included the # 250,000 on the papers sent to the Lords
Appointments Commission, because it was not a donation, and was therefore not legally required to be disclosed.
In March 2006, several men nominated for life peerages by then Prime Minister Tony Blair [1] were rejected by the House of Lords
Appointments Commission.
Sir Gulam Noon, the British - Indian food company millionaire, was also nominated by the Labour Party after having made donations and loaned money (he also had his nomination rejected by
the Appointments Commission).
[15] He has also stated in a letter to the House of Lords
Appointments Commission that «I feel that, given my accumulated experience and deep sense of public service, as well as being able to devote the time to undertake the responsibility effectively, I would be able to make a contribution to the parliamentary process.»
Last night, Mandelson wrote to the Lords
appointments commission, saying: «I am writing to ask you — in the public interest — to shine a light on this issue and to investigate whether Lord Ashcroft is currently satisfying the conditions that he was required to meet in order to be appointed to the House of Lords.»
Speaking to reporters in Downing Street, Mandelson said it was «not acceptable» for the House of Lords
appointments commission to refuse an inquiry on the grounds that it had not existed when Ashcroft became a peer.
In response to these cries of foul play, Tony Blair wistfully created the House of Lords
Appointments Commission, promising an end to the days of Prime Ministerial patronage.
It will have to be approved by the House of Lords
Appointments Commission.
The House of Lords
appointments commission, which has to vet political nominees for financial and other potential embarrassments but does not get a say on the political suitability of their appointment, is standing ready for a new political list, but does not expect one before the new year.
Following Ashcroft's revelations about his tax status yesterday, Business Secretary Mandelson has contacted the House of Lords
Appointments Commission, asking it to probe the Tory peer's arrangements.
It turns out fundamentally reforming one of the Houses of Parliament brings up quite a few unexpected questions, including Lords» pay and pensions; transitional arrangements; a statutory
appointments commission; the size of the House; etc, etc..
Little noticed today is that Michael Howard, now Lord Howard, has just been appointed to the Lords
Appointments Commission.
He lent his support to «giving
the Appointments Commission more powers to implement a new agreement», including a size cap and appointments formula for party peers.
a) Independence of cross-benchers and
the Appointments Commission must be maintained.
Labour got rid of most of the hereditary peers, and as a result most new peers are appointed by the political parties or the House of Lords
Appointments Commission.
Likewise, Lord Grocott, former Lords Chief Whip 2002 - 08, argued for «
the Appointments Commission deciding on the frequency of new batches of appointments and deciding on the overall numbers» because the size of the House of Lords is now «verging on the ridiculous and it needs to be dealt with».
The other 20 % of members would be chosen by
an appointments commission.
According to The Times, the Cabinet Office has raised ethical concerns about some of the names put forward by the former prime minister, while
the Appointments Commission must also approve any places in the House of Lords.