{"title":"Should the Prime Minister Sit in the House of Lords?","authors":"Conor Farrington","doi":"10.1111/1467-923x.13317","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract By long‐standing convention, the prime minister sits in the House of Commons. This article adopts the perspective of a thought experiment in which the premier moves to the House of Lords instead, exploring the potential advantages and drawbacks of this scenario from multiple perspectives. This move would entail shifts in the prime minister's roles and responsibilities, with knock‐on implications for the day‐to‐day functioning of the upper house. While a red‐bench premier would be less connected with the quotidian dynamics of electoral politics, they could also take a more strategic, long‐term view of politics and engage more actively in deliberative debate in a revitalised second chamber. The shift would also prompt significant debates surrounding non‐elective aspects of the constitution, including the House of Lords, raising important questions about legitimacy and representation. While acknowledging the unlikelihood of such a change, the article argues nonetheless that—as with all thought experiments—taking the possibility seriously can stimulate deeper thinking and challenge conventional assumptions about constitutional arrangements.","PeriodicalId":47439,"journal":{"name":"Political Quarterly","volume":"38 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Political Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-923x.13317","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Abstract By long‐standing convention, the prime minister sits in the House of Commons. This article adopts the perspective of a thought experiment in which the premier moves to the House of Lords instead, exploring the potential advantages and drawbacks of this scenario from multiple perspectives. This move would entail shifts in the prime minister's roles and responsibilities, with knock‐on implications for the day‐to‐day functioning of the upper house. While a red‐bench premier would be less connected with the quotidian dynamics of electoral politics, they could also take a more strategic, long‐term view of politics and engage more actively in deliberative debate in a revitalised second chamber. The shift would also prompt significant debates surrounding non‐elective aspects of the constitution, including the House of Lords, raising important questions about legitimacy and representation. While acknowledging the unlikelihood of such a change, the article argues nonetheless that—as with all thought experiments—taking the possibility seriously can stimulate deeper thinking and challenge conventional assumptions about constitutional arrangements.
期刊介绍:
Since its foundation in 1930, The Political Quarterly has explored and debated the key issues of the day. It is dedicated to political and social reform and has long acted as a conduit between policy-makers, commentators and academics. The Political Quarterly addresses current issues through serious and thought-provoking articles, written in clear jargon-free English."The Political Quarterly plays host to some of the best writing about both topical issues and underlying trends in UK and European politics"Professor Lord Raymond Plant