The initial role of the House of Lords (HoL) was to protect entitled gentry’s stolen land. The stolen land and stolen power were passed on hereditarily. Some hereditary lords linger, like ancient sewers.
Most current peers are creations of political expedience. Successive governments invented new peers and rammed more and more into the chamber to try to alter the party balance. Former Tory prime minister David Cameron pumped up the HoL volume beyond capacity; his many new peerages were little “thank yous” to all his tax-avoiding friends and donors.
Theresa May, as a direct response to HoL amendments to the government’s Brexit bill, shoved some new Tory peers in and a DUP lord too – William McCrea. (McCrea enabled loyalist terrorism and promoted NHS funding for the cranks of homeopathy.) May’s response was petulant but praise from so-called liberals for the HoL amendments was equally daft. The liberals’ support for the unelected, politically appointed peers was desperation and screaming hypocrisy.
Opposition to the existence of the HoL must be without caveats and without conditions. In scenarios where peers delay or obstruct Tory policy, however welcome that may appear to be, any praise for the HoL is misplaced and reveals the untrustworthiness of whoever is issuing the praise. If the peers can obstruct the Tories then they can obstruct any other political party that is in government.
The HoL is a legacy obstacle. It opposes social democracy, always. The HoL is in the way and it needs to be shifted out of the way, permanently, and destroyed. There are no caveats, exceptions, ‘buts’ or ‘howevers’ allowed in honest opposition to the HoL.