Member

The noble Lord’s comments appeared to make the point that hereditary Peers contribute far more and better than life Peers. I have never, in anything I have said—and I challenge noble Lords who have said otherwise—denigrated any noble Lord in this House, by whichever route they have come to this House. However, if we are trying to make a case, as some have done, that somehow it is a better route because they are more independent and more active, the average time of speaking contributions, in days, by Peer type are as follows: life Peers 70, hereditary Peers 48. As a proportion of days attended, the figures are: life Peers 18%, hereditary Peers 14%, judicial 14%. Those figures are for the 2019-24 Parliament. So there is really little difference; it is not much to crow about, and it is probably disingenuous to stress it.