Reforming the Upper House: Lessons from Britain
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21991/C9KX1XAbstract
For nearly two decades Britain has been engaged
in some of the most ambitious constitutional and
parliamentary reforms since the Reform Acts of
the nineteenth century. Reform in the House of
Lords alone has produced six White Papers, one
Royal Commission, and dozens more parliamentary
votes and reports by the House of Commons,
the House of Lords and the joint committees.
Canadians have watched these developments
with particular interest, since many of the issues
debated - the legitimacy of an Upper House,
election versus appointment, and qualifi cations
for membership - are similar to those discussed
here. Yet before looking at possible lessons for
Canada we need to refl ect upon another question:
What is the Westminster Model and what
elements of this model are refl ected in our own
system?
Downloads
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with Constitutional Forum constitutionnel grant the journal the right of first publication, and agree to license the work under an Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs (CC BY-NC-ND) that allows others to share the work for non-commercial purposes, with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal, as long as no changes are made to the original work. Please use this format to attribute this work to Constitutional Forum constitutionnel:
"First published as: Title of Article, Contributor, Constitutional Forum constitutionnel Volume/Issue, Copyright © [year], Publisher"