should the house of lords be abolished or reformed
It is much debated as to whether the House of Lords needs reforming or abolition, there are many conflicting ideas and arguments to consider. ... Clearly, in such a populated country such as Great Britain, a Second Chamber of Parliament also known as the House of Lords is necessary. Although the House of Lords cannot execute much power, compared to the House of Commons, it is a vital part of British Government. The House of Lords plays an important part in revising, potentially delaying legislation and as well as keeping a check on Government by scrutinizing its activities. ... Members of the Lords are not elected and are unpaid. ... For example, there have been 158 members of the House of Lords that were once MPs, (the breakdown is as follows; Conservatives 77, Labour 55, Liberal Democrats 14, Crossbenchers 9, other 3). Peers also provide a source of independent expertise as the House has among its members a number of University Chancellors, professors, and writers. The House also has a judicial role as the final Court of Appeal. Although the House of Lords perform many functions to help Government flow smoothly, it has many flaws including being undemocratic as members are appointed, not voted in by the people (as mentioned before). ... To understand the functions of the House of Lords, one has to first look at how it has evolved throughout history. The House of Lords has slowly lost its power throughout time. ... Although the Commons had control over money bills, the Lords had the power to veto legislation. Soon, in 1909, a dispute broke out between the House of Commons and the House of Lords over a budget that was rejected by the Lords.