House of Lords

===20th century===
[[File:1911-New-Perrs-UK-Punch.jpg|thumb|upright=1.35|left|''Punch'' 1911 cartoon shows Asquith and Lloyd George preparing coronets for 500 new peers to threaten takeover of the House of Lords]]

The status of the House of Lords returned to the forefront of debate after the election of a Liberal Government in 1906. In 1909 the [[Chancellor of the Exchequer]], [[David Lloyd George]], introduced into the [[British House of Commons|House of Commons]] the "[[People's Budget]]", which proposed a land tax targeting wealthy landowners. The popular measure, however, was defeated in the heavily Conservative House of Lords.<ref>[[George Dangerfield]], ''[[The Strange Death of Liberal England]]'' (1935) [https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.175390 online free]</ref>

Having made the powers of the House of Lords a primary campaign issue, the Liberals were narrowly re-elected in [[January 1910 United Kingdom general election|January 1910]]. The Liberals had lost most of their support in the Lords, which was routinely rejecting Liberals' bills. Prime Minister [[H. H. Asquith]] then proposed that the powers of the House of Lords be severely curtailed. After a further [[December 1910 United Kingdom general election|general election in December 1910]], and with a reluctant promise by King [[George V]] to create sufficient new Liberal peers to overcome the Lords' opposition to the measure if necessary, the Asquith Government secured the passage of a bill to curtail the powers of the House of Lords.<ref>Kenneth Rose, ''King George V'' (1984) pp. 113, 121.</ref> The [[Parliament Act 1911]] effectively abolished the power of the House of Lords to reject legislation, or to amend it in a way unacceptable to the House of Commons; and most bills could be delayed for no more than three parliamentary sessions or two calendar years. It was not meant to be a permanent solution; more comprehensive reforms were planned.<ref>R. C. K. Ensor, ''England 1870–1914'' (1936), p. 430–432.</ref><ref>Alfred L.P. Dennis, "The Parliament Act of 1911, II". ''American Political Science Review'' (1912): 386–408.</ref> Neither party, however, pursued reforms with much enthusiasm, and the House of Lords remained primarily hereditary. The [[Parliament Act 1949]] reduced the delaying power of the House of Lords further to two sessions or one year. In 1958, the predominantly hereditary nature of the House of Lords was changed by the [[Life Peerages Act 1958]], which authorised the creation of life baronies, with no numerical limits. The number of life peers then gradually increased, though not at a constant rate.<ref>Chris Ballinger, ''The House of Lords 1911–2011: a century of non-reform'' (Bloomsbury, 2014).</ref>

The Labour Party had, for most of the 20th century, a commitment, based on the party's historic opposition to class privilege, to abolish the House of Lords, or at least expel the hereditary element. In 1968 the Labour Government of [[Harold Wilson]] attempted to reform the House of Lords by introducing a system under which hereditary peers would be allowed to remain in the House and take part in debate, but would be unable to vote. This plan, however, was defeated in the House of Commons by a coalition of traditionalist Conservatives (such as [[Enoch Powell]]), and Labour members who continued to advocate the outright abolition of the Upper House (such as [[Michael Foot]]).

When Foot became leader of the Labour Party in 1980, abolition of the House of Lords became a part of the party's agenda; under his successor, [[Neil Kinnock]], however, a reformed Upper House was proposed instead. In the meantime, the creation of new hereditary peerages (except for members of the Royal Family) has been arrested, with the exception of three that were created during the administration of Conservative PM [[Margaret Thatcher]] in the 1980s.

Whilst some hereditary peers were at best apathetic, the Labour Party's clear commitments were not lost on [[Merlin Hanbury-Tracy, 7th Baron Sudeley]], who for decades was considered an expert on the House of Lords. In December 1979 the [[Conservative Monday Club]] published his extensive paper entitled ''Lords Reform – Why tamper with the House of Lords?'' and in July 1980 [[International Monarchist League|''The Monarchist'']] carried another article by Sudeley entitled "Why Reform or Abolish the House of Lords?".<ref>''The Monarchist'', no. 57, p.&nbsp;27–34</ref> In 1990 he wrote a further booklet for the Monday Club entitled "The Preservation of the House of Lords".