Elected governments usually appoint to all the most powerful roles in government from amongst their elected MPs, recognising the need for them to be answerable to the House of Commons and for their words and deeds to have the legitimacy of an elected mandate. MPs can get even more angry if a senior Minister is in the Lords at a time when the policy is going wrong. A Minister in the Lords has to be represented by a Commons Minister for questions, statements and bill work in the Commons Chamber, but can be summonsed by MPs in Select Committee to explain themselves when needed. Most Lords Ministers in internal government and Ministerial discussions defer to their elected Commons colleagues, and are sensitive to the priority given to the views of those who have been elected.
It is also true that PMs do wish to bring some talent and special knowledge into Ministerial ranks, and do so by inviting people to become Ministers in the Lords. Margaret Thatcher for example appointed David Young as a Cabinet Minister and part of the economic team for his skills in business. In the present government the PM has chosen Lord Hermer, a lawyer friend, to be Attorney General and to attend Cabinet. He is one of the most powerful Ministers in the government using his access to the PM to influence policy generally and using his legal supervision to intervene in a very wide range of other issues and other Ministers’ activities. Baroness (Angela) Smith as Leader of the Lords is a Cabinet member, consulted on a wide range of issues relating to the passage of government business through the second chamber. She is also a senior Minister of State in the DWP giving that department effectively two cabinet seats. Baroness Chapman is Minister of State in the Foreign Office responsible for Overseas Aid which has in the past been a separate department and is an important command. Lord Vallance has been brought in as Minister for Science and in the Energy Department for his bureaucratic and scientific expertise and presumably is very influential in those crucial areas. At Education Baroness (Jacqui) Smith as a Minister of State brings previous experience as Home Secretary and will doubtless be consulted on a range of important issues beyond her immediate brief. She sometimes is asked to do general interviews for the government on difficult days. Lord Timpson as Minister of State for Prisons probably has wide ranging powers to reform and direct prisons policy and management given his past experience and views. Lord Hanson, a former senior MP, may get a fair hearing at the Home Department and will not lack opinions. Lord Hendy at Transport was brought in for his past experience in senior management roles in public transport, so he will wield considerable influence over rail policy. Lord Coaker is respected in defence fields where he is a Minister of State. Lady Levitt is recently appointed and a junior Minister, but as the former legal adviser to Keir Starmer when he was Head of the CPS may have access and influence on legal matters.
Where a senior Minister of State in the Lords effectively has delegated power from the Secretary of State to make policy and direct an important part of a department, Lords scrutiny becomes particularly important. It is in the Lords that the important Minister can be questioned and required to report more fully. Many Lords Ministers are junior Ministers and rely on departmental briefings when they have to report and defend the actions of Commons Ministers to the Lords. The exchanges in the Lords mainly rehearse arguments the Commons controls, and the junior Minister can only report back to the boss the Lords criticisms.
It may be that some other Lords Ministers do wield important influence behind the scenes, but so do civil servants, lobbyists and others. The accountable person is rightly the most powerful Minister who will usually be in the Commons. Lords Ministers have to be aware that their conduct will be subject to Lords scrutiny and discipline.
February 24, 2026
If the second chamber is there to run checks and balances on the first, why have so many influential members with their feet in both camps? From the outside it looks at worst like a racket or at least, a rotten system.
I can understand the need for liaison between the two bodies, but it’s the embedding of Party politics and placemen/women through patronage that undermines the credibility of the second chamber. Even the independent Members you mentioned yesterday must ultimately be selected by a large swathe of non-independent Members.
I don’t have a magic solution. I do think a proportion of members should be selected by lot (any sane citizen with no unspent convictions could enter), and a proportion elected (not under a Party ticket and with any Party affiliation disclosed).
February 24, 2026
Good morning.
I can only repeat what I said before – Jobs for the boys and girls.
February 24, 2026
You mention Lord Hermer. Never voted for and interfering in every aspect of government. Together with his close friend responsible for the Chagos fiasco. Also his close friend acting on behalf of the Mauritius government, all very cosy.
Jaqui Smith, another odd appointment especially afterthought expenses fiasco but hey ho, it’s only taxpayers money feathering their nests.
There is some truth in the saying Housecof Frauds.
February 24, 2026
Good Morning,
We can see today how ineffective, if not damaging, it is to limit the appointment of ministers to elected politicians. I would welcome the ability of the PM to appoint whomever he/she wishes to these positions, in an effort to find those with the appropriate knowledge, competence and probity to DO THE JOB, rather than working to replace the PM.
February 24, 2026
the most interesting current one is Timpson, who did great things with ex prisoners long before entering government. he did have some great ideas. he is undoubtedly being forced to keep quiet about how crap the wider government is. his many great ideas for improving the prison system have failed in contact with the crap public sector, and he has become too woke and forgotten that prisons are there to protect the rest of us from the most evil, so a lot of his early release have been mistakes. on the other hand people like alex belfield suffered way too long inside, way too secure conditions, and now way too restrictive early release conditions, just because the system doesn’t like his right wing views. it will be interesting what Timpson says when he eventually gets out of government, but I think he has been a sad failure.
February 24, 2026
There is no constitutional impediment to Ministers from outside the Commons answering at the Bar of the House or in committee or elsewhere.
Accountability for them rests with the PM, the King’s Minister, as it does for all Ministers. So long as he or she is in the Commons there is no democratic deficit.
We should be governed by the best people available. That they must also be elected members of a House nominated and populated by tiny unrepresentative cliques, which is what political parties have become, is too much to expect.
February 24, 2026
I do not have a problem with members of the House of Lords becoming Ministers IF they have genuine expertise in a particular area. If they had previously elected to the Commons and appointed as a Cabinet Minister, I think that could qualify as genuine expertise (much as I hate to admit it in the case of Jacqui Smith).
The quality of MPs needs to be raised by setting some basic standards relating to age and experience. With the PPE-SpAd-Safe Seat-Bag Carrier-Minister route …. all in the space of 5 years – firmly closed down.
Ministerial Lords can appear before Select Committees which are made up of MPs from the Commons. I therefore don’t think it would be outside the bounds of possibilities to change Parliamentary procedures so that they could appear in the Commons occasionally, if necessary, to answer questions regarding their Ministerial responsibility.
February 24, 2026
By directly appointing the head of the Civil Service, and then firing him, and then appointing a new head more to his liking, and also directly appointing out Ambassador to USA Starmer has shown the way forward – senior Civil Service posts need to be political appointments and then we can get some good private sector bosses in to manage some of these failing departments and functions (such as procurement). It’s not as if the Civil Service isn’t already politicised, it’s just that there is currently no balance because they are mostly left-wing.
February 24, 2026
Many see no need for a non-elected second chamber, particularly hereditary peers and the bishops. Politicians pack the Lords with sycophants and people who have made large donations to party funds. Even Russians
For those who see elevation to the peerage as recognition by the Establishment for services rendered and who will take an active part in proceedings, good luck.
The Lords are part of our unwritten constitution. We should remember that these people gave us centuries of serfdom after the Norman Conquest, dispossession of land rights in favour of sheep (“the Woolsack”) and enforced service in their petty wars