Constitutional Reformation

The lords still had powers comparable to the commons; however the lords never interfered with ‘money bills’ such as budgets. The lords could amend any other bill any number of times. As the commons became more democratic, the unelected upper house appeared even more unfair to have an impact compared to the elected.

The conservative leader Disraeli, in 1870 came up with a three point system for the lords, who argued that lords should only veto if:

• Opinion in the commons was very divided
• Clear feeling of public rejection
• Issue so fundamental, that a general election had to happen to see how the public voted.

This was used on the issue of Gladstone’s first home rule bill as it met the second issue, and the Gladstonian government backed down. The 1906 election gave the liberals a huge majority compared to the conservative lords, and so it was now unlikely the first option would be met.

The crisis was triggered by Lloyd George’s budget of 1909, not because of the extent of reform as they agreed it was good (conservatives) but because the conservatives were now so weak in the commons, that they tried to balance power back by using the lords. Balfour attempted to use effectively in such areas as the

• Education bill of 1906, of which nonconformists were now recognised, as Anglican schools were taken over by Lea’s, not taking into account teaching religions. This angered the Anglicans, Balfour attempted to oppose and then compromise the commons, but this failed.
• Plural voting ending, individuals allowed to vote in more than once constituency
• Licensing bill of restrictions of alcohol

Lords however let most things through.

The government responded with some confusion, whether to confront the peers or not over these issues, the major problem being a lack of cause to confront. HCB introduced resolutions to limit the power of lords with delay and veto and amend; LIB/LAB/INP all supported this. But it was just a warning, as cabinet still had no idea what to do as members such as Sir Grey wanted to reform the lords as a priority.

The budget was the real problem, as the liberals were now beginning to lose favour and reforms seemed to be having little effect, the budget had to be ambitious and reforming, without cutting back or spending too much. LG + ASQUITH put pressure on cabinet to agree to reform of taxation so that the budget borrowing was not too extensive. Because it was a budget, the lords would naturally not object, but as rumours grew of how revolutionary this budget was going to be, peers started to consider breaking the tradition. The budget;

• Raising income taxation on incomes over 3000 to 6p and 8,1/2p for incomes over 5000 pounds
• Increase duties on spirits, liquor licenses, and stamp duties,
• Increase death duties
• Land tax on increasing value of land, increased value when it changes hands, and value of land for mining companies
• Road fund for building + maintenance road, by petrol and licenses
• Child allowances.

This lead to widespread opposition;

• Some liberals had doubts
• INP opposed duty on whisky fearing it would damage trade
• Brewers outraged
• Motorists unimpressed
• Landowners subjected to unfair treatment, could be used to distribute wealth and an ‘attack on property’

Crux (centre point of issue) for Balfour and Lansdowne was tariff reform, as unionists now supported it. Tariff reformers mention that the money could only be found through taxation of imports, whilst the government still proposed free trade which made the unionists seem obscure, and led to an extension of free trade/protectionism debate. The liberals won this debate.

Lansdowne + Balfour as they worried about future policies because tariff reform was affected, and had lost the control of the unionist peers who had not realised the emotions that the budget had stirred up in the peers, who effectively saw the budget as an attack on property and so immediately rejected, leading to Asquith dissolving parliament

GEN ELECTION 1910 saw the results as being unsatisfactory for everyone, with a very equal number of seats for liberals/unionists. The budget was still in support however with the INP and labour supporting the liberals, but the INP requested Home Rule for support. Lords now had to pass judgement as they had little choice in reality. This lead to the liberals also having home rule forced upon them, and could face another constitutional problem very soon, matching the third rule of disraeli

PARLIAMENT BILL 1910-11

• Lords could not reject or amend financial legislation
• There would be a limit of two rejections or amendments on legislation within life of a parliament
• Max duration of parliament was 5 years.

Lords could only delay for two years now and if the lords objected this bill, the king had agreed with Asquith that up to 500 new liberal peers could be made to see the parliament bill through. The conservative peers accepted the bill rather than having being in the minority forever in the lords.

SUMMARY
Lords held balance of power over commons
- Unlimited veto except against money. Disraeli's three veto allowances had been exercised by Gladstones first home rule (public dislike). Liberal majority ruled out likelihood of division in the commons, Balfour often tried to undermine Libs using the lords
- Ed act and Plural Voting.

Libs didn't know how to take it, start to think about removing lords power or amend. Everyone except Cons agreed.
LLOYD GEORGES BUDGET 1909 was the issue - revolutionary without spending too little or too much. Lords hearing became apprehensive, maybe veto a money bill
Budget - Land Tax increase angered lords
- INP against Whisky and Brewery
- Road Tax for the first time
- Graduated tax on wealth
difficult for tariff reformer unionists, Balfour/Lansdowne worried, making them look further obscure on the Tariff Reform issue. Not intend to veto fully but didnt predict emotion within lords. Bill was rejected causing the 1910 GEN ELECTION.
GE - equal numbers, INP gave liberals vote. Conservatives realised lords had no choice, Budget was passed.

Parliament bill, limited veto
threatened creation of 500 liberal peers after lords turned it down in 1910.