Lord Cromwell (CB)

My Lords, my goodness, what an education we have had tonight, across such a broad range of topics and ages. My remarks may fall short in that regard, but during the thankfully now concluded debates on the hereditary presence in this House, I tabled an amendment that, in line with the Government’s wider manifesto commitments, proposed that a group be established shortly after the passing of the Bill to address ongoing membership criteria, in particular the issue of participation, and this was widely supported. I was therefore very grateful when the committee that produced this excellent report was promptly brought into being. I congratulate, in particular, the noble Baroness, Lady Taylor, who, like a modern Odysseus, has had to navigate a very difficult course between the whirlpools of controversy, the sirens of special pleading and the ever-present danger of mutiny, as whatever course they took would impact friends and colleagues in this House. As the committee highlighted, if these issues are not addressed by this House, something less understanding of the role and workings of this place might be imposed on it by the House of Commons. That remains a real risk if the report’s proposals are not now acted on. On the age cap, if I may comment as a mere stripling, while perhaps most of us surely accept, as did the noble Baroness, Lady Watkins, in her speech, that we are not completely irreplaceable, we all know Members who are valuable contributors with a depth of long-term experience and wisdom that the House would be sad to lose on the basis of age alone. I suggested in my evidence to the committee that age should not be the issue but rather capacity—perhaps on a medically tested basis. But I have subsequently come to accept that the graduated progress towards an age cap recommended by the report would be less personally intrusive, give Members more clarity and thereby manage expectations. I also suggest that it is a privilege not just to come into this House but, at the age of 80, to have served well beyond the retirement age for almost any other role. On the negative side, which has been touched on widely, this will have an unbalancing numerical impact on party groups, in particular the Cross Benches. Perhaps the Leader of the House will comment further when winding up on what proposals the Government have in mind to bring forward on this. One suggestion might be that everybody on the Cross Benches gets three votes—just an idea.