Tiny homes revisited

A further post concerning the social and economic benefits of tiny homes, and the legislative changes required in the UK.

Housing and the provision of new homes appears to be a hot electoral issue. For many, house prices are unaffordable, especially in rural areas, and making greenbelt available for homes comes at a social, environmental and electoral cost.

As we discussed here, social care for an ageing population is in crisis, and one of vanishingly few accommodation solutions to manage early cognitive decline is the removal of the elderly from their homes into costly care.

But might there be another possibility that answers all three of our pressing needs: those of housing, social care for the elderly, and environmental management?

New Zealand leads the way with legislation providing that tiny houses (35-80 sqm) built on a trailer are classified as vehicles and not buildings. They do not avoid planning laws totally; but the rules provide substantially more flexibility than our UK legislation. And they are becoming very popular to provide alternative independent accommodation for both young and old.

Here in the UK S.55(1) Town and Country Planning Act 1990 requires specific planning permission for the addition or alteration of structures on land, and this captures almost all tiny homes. Schedule 1 Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act 1960 sets out the exceptions, but use of a tiny home ‘independent’ of the main residence on the land is not one of them. UK exemptions from planning permissions currently apply only in authorised locations and for ‘caravan’ construction not exceeding 20m length x 6.8m width x 3.05 height.

In 1960 the Caravan Sites Act may have been wise legislation. Following the blitz, WW2 prefabs seen as a temporary solution to a housing problem under Churchill’s Temporary Housing Programme, had not the best reputation. Construction methods, whilst efficient for their time, did not provide security, adequate insulation or the permanence that was seen as essential to address long term housing need. There was also the fear that derestriction would allow a proliferation of gypsy and traveller encampments. This was an ongoing concern as evident in this House of Commons fascinating debate in 2005.

Construction methods and insulation for tiny homes have massively improved. They are now entirely viable for permanent occupation in any temperature, in any country throughout the year. Moreover, the environmental benefits of a properly constructed tiny home can exceed that of bricks and mortar.

Perhaps we should be looking to optimise the tiny home solution by:

• Changing the national planning requirements for the location of tiny homes, namely non-permanent structures fabricated within prescribed dimensions and to construction and insulation criteria;
• Engaging financial incentives for occupants of homes with gardens/land to provide accommodation for tiny home/s that are located within two metres of their boundary;
• Enabling councils to authorise 5, 10 and 20 year permissions for the location of tiny homes that comply with the above requirements;
• Altering capital gains and inheritance tax laws to incentivise communal living arrangements involving tiny homes, namely by zero-rating such transfers over the sliding scale of the permissions.

Many retired or recently bereaved seniors would be delighted to sell their (often larger) family homes to relocate and invest within the curtilage of their children and grandchildren’s home. Residing in proximity to a relative’s home may secure for them (and society) several extra years of supported independent living. Additionally, the arrangement may enable reinvestment from proceeds of sale of the former family home to a new property that offers the additional space to accommodate a tiny home.

In summary, the advantages of these arrangements could release back into the market place under-occupied homes of seniors, potentially reduce burdens on social care for the elderly, enable grandparents to provide localised childcare for working parents; provide environmental benefits from near-net-zero fabrication of tiny homes;  linked to the incentive of Inheritance tax exemption.

Advertisements appearing within and below this post are placed by the platform not the writer. They are neither endorsed nor monetarised.

*

*

*

Cognitive deterioration – pathways to enhance ageing.

A post addressing the way our minds age, and some handy tips on staying bright.

Are you excited by the news concerning the new dementia drugs lecanemab and donanemab, intravenous monoclonal antibodies that appear to remove damaging β-amyloid plaques from the brain?

Writing in this week’s ‘Lancet’, Professors William J Jagust MD, Charlotte E Teunissen PhD, and Charles De Carli MD sound a note of warning. Having excessive β-amyloid plaques may be an explanation for some cases of cognitive decline, but not necessarily all. They suggest that multiple brain pathological changes, brain inflammation, and host other factors might also be involved in causing the onset of dementia.

Here in the UK, only 60% of an estimated 900,000 people with dementia actually receive a clinical diagnosis, according to researchers Christopher R S Belder, Jonathan M Schott and Nick C Fox. This is due to a dearth of structural imaging (scanning), leaving diagnostics to be undertaken by fragmented dementia services, inadequately resourced and staffed, and mainly community-based. Thereafter less than 2% of patients who have been diagnosed get molecular confirmation of their disease using CSF biomarkers. The upshot is, whilst medication may be approved by NICE, due to late diagnosis you may not get treatment in time – or at all.

In my previous post here on the blog dealing with prevention I discussed the role of vitamin D3 supplementation in reducing the incidence of dementia, and in my ‘Does Biking Better the Brain‘ post we looked at retaining neuroplasticity by lowering hypertension through low-impact physical exercise and mental stimulation.

Yet nationally, we do not seem to have a proper or adequate plan for the future of dementia care. David Cameron, former PM and current President of Alzheimer’s Research UK sought (unsuccessfully) to initiate a change of approach.

In truth our ageing population raises the prospect of a tsunami of dementia, with significant pinch-points at the crossroads where medical and social care meet. It is quite conceivable that many of us may spend the last decade of our lives with dementia. According to Alzheimers.org.uk our personal cost of dementia care will typically be between £100-500k – a UK average national cost of £32,250 per year. Perhaps mitigation of risk, and early diagnosis of onset is not a bad idea?

It may well be that medical break-throughs are effective at reducing the incidence of cognitive decline. However, in the absence of guaranteed prevention or publicly provided social care, might we need to address the issue ourselves: whether by future-proofing our living accommodation, preparing Powers of Attorney to ensure our future care, or simply adapting our lifestyle whilst we are still able?

Advertisements appearing within and below this post are placed by the platform, not the writer. They are neither endorsed nor monetarised.

*

*

*

*

D3 or crosswords?

A post about dementia and vitamin D3 – with thanks to Psychology Today for the picture.

On 1 March 2023 the Alzheimer’s Association published a peer-reviewed scientific paper centred on the relationship between vitamin D supplementation and dementia. To read it (which I recommend) simply click the link here or above.

In summary, a massive 12,388 individuals were involved over ten years in the Canadian study. The findings revealed that Vitamin D exposure was associated with 40% lower dementia incidence versus no exposure, meaning that those that received D3 supplements were significantly better protected from dementia than those that did not. Results were enhanced for males, and also those who entered the study dementia-free.

Many earlier studies have focused on the health benefits of vitamin D, in particular D3 (do read my previous post here). Vitamin D is naturally generated in the body through skin exposure to sunlight, and appears to be of significance for day-to-day health. Humans would historically have gained sufficient natural exposure in our more primitive lifestyle, but migration to Europe and the north where daylight is restricted during winter has resulted in a deficiency.

According to the Alzheimer’s Society, currently there are 900,000 people in the UK living with dementia. With an ageing population, the incidence is set to become a massive challenge to society, not least in the provision of safe later-life care.

Rather than relying on crosswords, perhaps now is the time to make your investment in a vitamin D3 supplement? It appears to have no down-side or side effects – see here and here. Vitamin D3 supplementation may actually be the answer to the question of how to ensure a longer, healthier and more productive life?

I should add that I have no financial interests in vitamin supplements of any kind. Advertisements appearing below this post are placed randomly by the platform, not the writer. They are neither endorsed nor monetarised.

Argentine tango under the microscope

A post dealing with the microbiology of Argentine tango (but do read on if you like trees).

My post ‘Learning something from trees‘ appears to have interested my dowsing colleagues that explore and exercise their personal energy; but surprisingly also, my friends who dance tango.

For those few that are not yet familiar with Argentine tango as danced in Buenos Aires (in contrast the the European pastiche), let me start by sharing a few truths.

More than the deadliest virus, once infected with Argentine tango, colonisation is rapid. Your social media fills with classes, events, milongas – your vocabulary embraces ochos, sacadas, boleos, colgadas – your wardrobe becomes populated by tango clothes and shoes – and frequently, non-dancing friends fall by the wayside as you become more and more fixated on your new obsession. Symptoms involve a craving that transcends normal preoccupation. It can be a lifelong dependence for which there is no known remedy.

The reason for such obsession is not what you might have thought. Alright, there may be romance – the late night milonga (the social event devoted to tango), gorgeous Golden Age tango music, a beautiful partner in your arms. Yet it is that which happens quite spontaneously within the tango embrace that really triggers this compulsive behaviour. ‘The magic’ emanates from the embrace in which you or your partner need be neither young nor beautiful. It all turns on energy, and how we deploy it in movement.

In dance, electrical events known as ‘action potentials‘ (rapid sequences of voltage differential across a membrane) cause neurons to release the pleasure inducing neurotransmitters of dopamine (movement), serotonin, norepinephrine (brain), and various endorphins (inhibitory neurotransmitters). What is it in dance that triggers that process? And what evolutionary advantages justify the release of such a pleasure hit?

With age, practice, experience and skill, tangueros appear to develop an electrical charge. Atoms and their pairs of electrons line up to create an energy field that is manifest within the embrace, sometimes subtle and occasionally dynamic. Studies show that, irrespective of steps (for Argentine tango is systematically unstructured) or experience, dancers’ breathing and heart rates synchronise.

Sharing of energy through symbiotic synchronicity seems essential for both trees and humans, perhaps because of a long-lost shared heritage where 50% of our DNA is in common with trees. But more staggeringly, our genes and DNA structure more closely associate us with the mycelium that envelops their roots and occupies our gut.

Might it be our shared match with mushrooms that causes us to dance?

Advertisements appearing below this post are placed by the platform, not the writer. They are neither endorsed nor monetarised.

Learning something from trees

A post about humans, trees, anthropomorphism, mycorrhizal mycelium and quorum sensing.

As a young Prince, King Charles III famously hugged a tree. It is not recorded what was said by either Prince or tree, or whether his act was met with arboreal approval or dismissal. However, according to his aides, he continues the practice publicly every time he plants a commemorative sapling.

We now know that trees enjoy two-way communication (if not with Kings) certainly with the symbiotic mycorrhizal mycelium (fungus threads) that envelop and enrich their roots. Here they exchange water, nitrogen, carbon and other minerals, with each other and with the tree’s progeny. Additionally, chemical messages pass via the fungus to communicate information of threats or abundance, suggesting that the process is heuristically reactive rather than mechanical.

Within the human body, indigenous bacteria (of which we have trillions outnumbering human cells 10-1) do very similar things. Cell to cell communication is facilitated by both prokaryotes and eukaryotes (single cell and multi-cell organisms), the former clubbing together using quorum-sensing circuits to enable them simultaneously to secrete signaling chemical molecules that communicate precise information – just as do murmurations of birds in the air, warrior ants on the march or bioluminescent plankton in the sea.

Go to any football, rugby or tennis match and you will see the same phenomenon acted out by a human audience, resulting in synchronized signals that convey pleasure or dismay. If at that very moment you were to take a microscope to the human body you would see why – the same bacterial microorganisms are busy synthesising autoinducing proteins that communicate their collective feelings and intention.

All I can say is that tonight when I took dousing rods to my eighty year old thirty three leafed Aspidistra, there was an immediate energetic resonance between the two. I did not enquire further of the plant, but I do recall, according to Feng Shui experts, that placing an Aspidistra in the main entryway of one’s home can collect an abundance of positive energy.

Maybe, rather than seeking to anthropomorphise trees by talking to them, or worse by felling them in their prime for profit, we should observe and revere them for the energy that they clearly share both with us and the world on which we depend?

Advertisements that may appear at the foot of this post are placed by the platform not the writer. They are neither endorsed nor monetarised.

Migration, asylum, designated places and extradition

A post intended to throw a little light on a misunderstood (or disunderstood) topic.

Let’s get straight to the point. The laws relating to regulation of entry to and forced departure from the UK have been an historical mess, and the fix is neither clear nor simple.

As a reaction to the horrors of World War 2, key nations met to sign the Refugee Convention of 1951 that bestowed on foreign migrants a shower of human rights. Questions remain – is the convention an essential anchor to fundamental human rights – or merely a brake on progress for change given the current migration landscape? Should the convention rights be unchangeable, or may they be qualified given criminal exploitation?

In medieval England, nationality was quite a straight forward topic: you were either a subject who owed allegiance to the monarch; or an alien. Empire and colonies complicated the issue slightly, but nevertheless our laws managed to accommodate our citizens of the dominion.

In 1687 England faced its first modern migration challenge when 50,000 Hugenots, French protestants fleeing Catholic oppression, began to arrive on English shores. Eighteen years later in 1705 we saw the first ‘Alien Act‘ aimed at the Scots after their ‘Act of Security‘ sought to oust the jurisdiction of the British Parliament on the succession of the monarch; and nearly a century later followed the Aliens Act 1793 aimed at regulating those fleeing the French guillotine in Paris.

In 1848 the Irish potato famine produced the first mass migration, London, Liverpool, Manchester and Glasgow alone sharing about 300,000 immigrants; and 1881 saw a huge migration of Jewish settlers, resulting in the Aliens Act 1905. This piece of legislation proved a turning point for Britain, being the first Act of Parliament that sought actively to control migration.

Progressing to modern times of the last century, two world wars brought about a significant global movement in populations, estimated in the millions, hence the introduction of the British Nationality and Status of Aliens Act 1914 which for the first time codified common law and statute.

World war one led in 1920 to the appointment of the ‘League of Nations High Commissioner for Refugees’, the office that oversaw the 1933 Convention Relating to the International Status of Refugees. It was this organisation that was to morph into the United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration, later the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). 

And then we reach the moment of the Refugee Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees 1951 which the UK signed in 1954. This convention produced a pivotal change in thinking, removing a case-by-case resolution of migration, to replace it with the global rights system which persists and binds the UK today.

Three years earlier the British Nationality Act 1948 had set about defining ‘nationality’ through citizenship. Twenty three years after that the Immigration Act 1971 was passed to control immigration and provide for deportation; closely followed by the British Nationality Act 1981 dealing again with the right of abode in the UK. Both remain in force.

The Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 sought to improve arrangements for removal from the jurisdiction, notification of suspicious marriages and provision of passenger information for those arriving in the UK. Within three years the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 made provision for the deprivation of British nationality and introduced the ‘life in the United Kingdom test’ and reintroduced the ‘Oath of Allegiance’. The Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Act 2006 (modified in 2014 and in 2016) went on to deal further with appeals, deportation on the basis of national security, employment of immigrants and financial support afforded to them. A year later saw the UK Borders Act 2007 enacted to introduce biometric registration and deal further with deportation, and in 2009 the Borders, Citizenship and Immigration Act sought to deal further with border functions, immigration and citizenship. Meanwhile the Extradition Act 2003 brought in a much needed framework to expedite removal of criminals.

Now we have the Nationality and Borders Act 2022 which seeks to further regulate asylum applications, accelerating appeals, addressing modern slavery and providing removal of migrants to a safe country. It is supported by Exclusion (Article 1F) and Article 33(2) of the Refugee Convention which advises on circumstances in which an individual may be excluded from the convention.

Even in this selective outline, you will appreciate the mess, especially were you to follow up all of my embedded links placed in the blog post.

In reality, the UK borders, migration and asylum policy has been made on the hoof, reacting to the latest perceived problem rather than fashioned to balance community interests and individual rights.

As a simple commentator, I wonder why nobody has taken on the task of a root-and-branch legal revision in simple terms: setting out the indispensable human rights against community interests to provide a definitive pathways to navigate between them? Perhaps a twenty first century starting point would be to enable applications for asylum to be made digitally, safely and securely from outside the jurisdiction rather than a designated place within it?

Immigration lawyers may have some answers. But I suspect your guesses may be better?

Advertisements appearing below this post are placed by the platform not the writer. They are neither endorsed nor monetarised.

Harry and Tom – the interview: regret, revenge or retail?

A post about Harry Sussex, his interview with Tom Bradby, his book ‘Spare’, and his responsibilities

Why do I have to steal myself to use the title ‘Prince’ in relation to Harry Sussex? Perhaps because Princes are supposed to be strong, to serve, to act with dignity, to bear their responsibilities with fortitude, and above all, to be beyond reproach.

That is the deal, and that is why historically our Royalty has been cushioned by skilled advisors of sound judgment who can examine matters dispassionately and steer those that otherwise lack the intellectual and emotional intelligence to manage their Royal affairs discretely.

ITV’s exclusive interview of Harry by Tom Bradby, to be aired on Sunday 8th January 2023, precedes the publication two days later of Harry Sussex and Meghan Markle’s book ‘Spare’, intended to write their history. Its title spells out its pitying destiny, as does the leaked spoiler, “they’ve shown absolutely no willingness to reconcile”, referring to his brother William and father, the King.

What Harry and his wife appear to misunderstand is that, save for a minority of republicans, as a nation we are ultimately wedded to our institutions rather than concerned to arbitrate their personalities. That is not to say that Royal stories don’t sell newspapers (or support ITV’s viewing statistics), but fundamentally most people want a calm constitutional monarchy and not a ‘tell-all’ account of brittle, seedy and dysfunctional family life.

The King finds himself in a massively difficult position between the rock of the Monarchy and the hard place of an errant son. Indeed to expect anything of our Monarch would be to place expectation above experience, given the prosaicism of his recent Christmas Royal Message to the nation.

Perhaps now – or shortly after publication on 10th January – would be a propitious moment for the House of Lords to send to Commons a Bill to disenfranchise the Prince from his national status, demanding a Letters Patent from the King to set Harry and his American family free from all Royal responsibilities – and the titles that go with them?

Advertisements appearing below this post are placed by the platform not the poster. They are neither endorsed nor monetarised.

*

*

*;

Death of the veranda

A post that looks back to the glory days of the veranda and questions its demise.

Do you have a veranda – the roofed platform built level with the ground floor along the outside of a house? Whatever happened to them? Why have UK architects and builders discarded verandas?

Looking at the new estates of private houses one answer is clear. Tightly packed with mean front gardens that serve no recreational or privacy purpose, housing schemes seem predicated on maximising developers’ profits rather than addressing social or aesthetic values. Verandas – an elegant sheltered space for morning coffee, to spend a rainy afternoon or as a retreat in the late afternoon – are no more. In their place, at best, we find the ‘conservatory’ – a structure that seems neither to conserve nor refresh.

Verandas, getting their name from the Spanish ‘baranda’ or ‘barandilla’, offer more than shade from the sun or shelter from the rain. Whilst these may have been their principal purposes in India, Portugal, Spain, South Africa, Australia and the southern states of the USA, verandas provide a place for contemplation and reflection. It is from the veranda that you may watch the sun rise, or the long afternoon shadows that fall across the garden. It is the veranda that is visited by early summer swallows, provide shelter for hedgehogs and from which we may spy a roe deer as it leaves the shelter of woodland.

Perhaps I am being too romantic about the role and purpose of the veranda? Have I absorbed too much of Daphne Du Maurier’s Rebecca – Manderley must have had a veranda, mustn’t it? Maybe, like the balcony or the orangery it is just a lost breath from the past that has no place in our hectic modern lives?

Advertisements that may appear below this post are placed by the platform, not the writer. They are neither endorsed nor monetarised.

*

*

*

*

The answer lies in the soil

A post examining human evolution and mycology – are we more than the fruiting bodies of fungi?

‘Fungi connect all living things in essential relational webs; without them, entire ecosystems would collapse’, reports writer and ecologist Doug Bierend. He explains, whilst body mass is mostly human generated, only 43% of our cells are human (the large cells). The rest are bacteria, fungi and microbes. For each 360 of our genes only one is human – the rest belong to other resident organisms.

Professors Ruth Ley and Taichi A. Suzuki observe that our gut bacteria has a long history. It accompanied the migration of our species from Africa, continuing to evolve with humans as we travelled and changed diet. Published in Salon on 30 September 2022, they report experiments showing that like genes, our gut microbes pass from one generation to the next. Given the amount of bacteria migrating through our bodies, male bacteria too is also transported to our children.

Endophytic fungi, microscopically visible as threads, are woven in and among the cells of plants– in their roots, stems, leaves, flowers, fruits. According to the biologist Merlin Sheldrake, their function is clear – to metabolise nutrients or to dissuade foraging, essentially acting as adopted organs to their host: and to receive photosynthesised energy compounds in return.

This view is a ‘top-down’ one. It assumes that evolution is a process concerning the perfection of species, from colonising primitive micro-organism to sophisticated mammal – the host. But what if humans are in fact part of the evolution of mycelium or bacteria? Did they colonise us, or are we indeed part of their process of evolution? In short, has our human form been developed by microbes to help disseminate and perpetuate their never-ending existence? Are we their genetic vehicles – simply an evolutionary ‘mobile carbon-banking asset’ for the bacteria that inhabit us??

One thing is certain – there is a vast number of connections and similarities between humans and the bacteria of which we comprise. Apart from genetic markers showing our common genesis, it is now known that the bacteria resident in our gut communicates information to our central processor, the brain. In turn, our brain responds to their messages and instruction. It is not that our brain (or whatever we consider to be ‘our consciousness’) is making decisions, but it is simply processing the data that it is given.

On a visual level, our brain bears distinct similarities to the slime mold fungus P. polycephalum, a single cell plasmodium. Experiments have shown that this fungus can take choices and make life-changing decisions. In 2000, biologist Toshiyuki Nakagaki reported an interesting experiment in Nature magazine, titled ‘Maze-solving by an amoeboid organism’. Given a food reward of oats this acellular organism identified the fastest route through an assortment of complex mazes. Other researchers found that the fungus also had memory. Although a single-celled organism, P. polycephalum operates as a network, exhibiting collective behavior. Each part of the slime mold is operating independently and sharing information with its neighboring sections, with no centralised processing. “I guess the analogy would be neurons in a brain,” biologist Chris Reid of Macquarie University says, “you have this one brain that’s composed of lots of neurons – it’s the same for the slime mold.”

Of course it is not known what other processes (if any) are carried out by the fungus, for nobody yet knows how information is propagated and shared within or without it. For example, might it feel joy or regret? However, like us, it certainly responds to outside stimuli and makes choices based upon its analysis of them. Incentives produce oscillation in the fungus, just as desires produce action in humans.

Chemical messages and reactions in living organisms appear to be triggered by electrical stimuli, in particular, changes in voltage. Most plants and even some mammals use these to communicate or navigate. Most humans appear to have retained minimal conscious sensitivity to these stimuli. However, some individuals claiming higher levels of perceptual sensitivity report that they recognise the events, even if they do not understand the cause. ESP, healers, dowsers, dancers and especially lovers acknowledge the presence of energy, its differential and its transmission.

Perhaps our human preoccupation with ‘self’ may be misguided? Might it be possible that we are just programmed by our bacteria, and our fate – both in life and death – lies in their hands and not ours?

Advertisements appearing below this post are placed by the platform not the writer. They are neither endorsed nor monetarised.

*

*

*

*

House of Lords reform – Starmer, Brown or none?

A post about the role of the House of Lords and the prospect of reform.

Brendan O’Neill, editor of ‘Spiked Online’, described the House of Lords as a “bloated ridiculous anti-democratic chamber“, and said that he believes it votes against things the general public want. His comments in 2020 triggered a post from me (here).

Today, Keir Starmer announced the Labour Party’s plans for constitutional reform, to include abolishing the Lords as currently constituted and to replace it with another elected chamber. This has led me to revisit the topic and to ask, ‘is an unelected House of Lords necessary, functional, and effective; or is it simply composed of unaccountable creatures of patronage, outdated and in need of reform?’

At the time of writing (December 2022), in contrast to membership of the House of Commons which comprises 650 members, absolute membership of the House of Lords is huge at 812 – with 774 members eligible this year, including 26 bishops and up to 91 hereditary peers. Merely 28% are women, and the average age of all is 71 years. Most members are political appointments, although a minority have been nominated because of social distinction. The presence of some members, including that of Baroness Mone of Mayfair, is controversial to say the least.

In its 2018 paper, the LSE based group Democratic Audit identified what they considered to be the requirements and functions of a second parliamentary chamber. I have summarised these below for convenience:

• Those who may approve, amend or reject legislation should be elected by voters, elected by the elected chamber, or appointed by a fully accountable government.
• No-one should sit in a second chamber by virtue of birth, wealth, or donating money or services to politicians.
• Serving in the second chamber may confer distinction, but should not involve an ‘honours’ system.
• Appointments to the chamber should be vetted for representative diversity by a regulatory body that may also remove those who breach legal or ethical standards.

And it should:

• Act as a constitutional policy check by identifying legislative changes that breach democratic principles.
• Help with legislative drafting, scrutiny and amendment.
• Increase the range of access to government.
• Re-balance geographical representation.
• Widen the range of expertise amongst legislators.
• Provide a mechanism to encourage ‘emeritus’ politicians to stay in public life.
• Offer a measure of policy continuity for the future.

Reform of the House of Lords is certainly possible within the lifetime of a new Parliament. Following legislative change in 2009, by October 2012 twelve justices of the Supreme Court took over the appellate jurisdiction of the House of Lords, making it, amongst other appellate functions, a constitutional court. Members of that court are vetted and appointed by an independent selection commission of senior ad hoc judges and members of the Appointments Commission for England and Wales.

The question remains, whilst we are willing to submit to an elected House of Commons, how do we feel about unelected, on occasions untalented political cronies being appointed to a second sovereign body sitting exclusively in London? The task of helping to formulate Labour’s policy on constitutional reform was outsourced to former Prime Minister Gordon Brown. We await his report, the content of which has been kept quite secret.

Is the time is now right for change. Should the House of Lords be abolished and not replaced? Perhaps it could be reformed? Maybe we should learn from the historic process when we divested the House of Lords of its judicial function; and return to the template from ‘Democratic Audit’ on what to achieve in a reformed second chamber?

Whilst an advert may appear at the foot, this blog is neither monetarised, nor endorsing any product

*

*

*