to recommend at least two people a year for appointment as non-party-political life peers who sit on the crossbenches;
tovet for propriety most other nominations for membership of the House of Lords, including those nominated by the UK political parties, nominations put forward by the Prime Minister for ministerial appointment in the House of Lords, for public service, and nominations in the Honours lists (including Resignation and Dissolution).
The Commission does not vet for propriety the appointments of the Bishops or Archbishops or the 92 hereditary peers who still sit in the House of Lords.
The Commission was established in May 2000 to assist the transitional arrangements for reform of the House of Lords. The role of the Prime Minister in making non-partisan recommendations to the King for creation of life peerages was partially[1] transferred to the Commission, in order to ensure greater transparency in the process. It was also given oversight of all other appointments to the Lords, including partisan nominations.
The Commission makes recommendations for the appointment of non-partisan life peers. It has established for itself seven criteria upon which to base its decisions, seeking to recommend people with
a record of significant achievement within their chosen way of life;
the ability to make an effective and significant contribution to the work of the House of Lords;
the time available to ensure they can make a contribution;
some understanding of the constitutional framework, including the place of the House of Lords;
integrity and independence;
a commitment to the highest standards of public life; and
The Commission has made recommendations for appointment on 16 occasions since its establishment in 2000, with a total of 67 people being recommended for peerages. All of these individuals went on to be nominated as and created life peers. Upon taking their seats, every one of them joined the crossbenches.
The fact that the type of people considered by the Commission for peers were to be neither aristocratic nor members of the "political class" led some in the British media to describe those it was to appoint as "people's peers".[8] This term has never been a formal classification.
The purpose of the reform was to make the process more open and those making appointments more accountable. Upon the establishment of the Commission, the Prime Minister Tony Blair said it would ensure a House of Lords that was "more representative of our diverse society"; suitable candidates would be sought "in a wider field than up to now".[8]
Following the first set of appointments in April 2001, it was, however, pointed out that those chosen included several knights as well as leading academics and scientists, having much the same establishment background that would have been made peers anyway. The Labour MP Diane Abbott described them as "the metropolitan elite".
The people recommended for appointment as life peers by the Commission since its establishment are listed below, by date of recommendation.[9][10][11][12][13]
In March 2006, the Commission objected to several men proposed for working peerages by Prime Minister Tony Blair, who had loaned large amounts of money to Blair's Labour Party. This led to the "Cash-for-Honours scandal."
In 2020, the Commission objected to the nomination of Peter Cruddas for a peerage by Prime Minister Boris Johnson. Cruddas had donated over £1,000,000 to Johnson's Conservative Party. Johnson nonetheless decided that the appointment should proceed, becoming the first ever prime minister to overrule an advice of the Commission.[14]
^"HOLAC Appointments". House of Lords Appointments Commission. 30 July 2009. Retrieved 7 September 2009.
^"Archived copy". www.brickcourt.co.uk. Archived from the original on 28 May 2019. Retrieved 13 January 2022.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)
