Tom Perrin: The House of Lords is a 21st century miracle. Let's remember this if it votes down Government plans today, as it did last week

Tom Perrin is a student who can be followed on twitter at @tomperrin93

Last week, the Government was defeated by the House of Lords on elements of its welfare form bill. Today, it will again consider parts of the bill - specifically, the proposal fundamentally to overhaul Disability Living Allowance.  As significant an event as this may be, behind it lurks the shade of an altogether different (certainly equally important) issue that, rather like a ghost from the shadows of the past, sporadically comes back to haunt us: namely, Lords’ reform. For some, these defeats will be reason enough to reform the House of Lords. But for me, the effect is contrary. They show the Lords at its best and exemplify perfectly why the proposed Coalition Bill to in effect abolish it must be opposed.

If we put the topical matter of the Government’s defeat and today's debate aside, what we see is something truly remarkable. We see the House of Lords, the second House of Parliament, opposing a Government bill with considerable force; thereby making the Government think twice and perhaps review aspects of its legislation. Surely that is accountability in action? The existence of an appointed House of Lords means that executive power is limited. With a House of Commons that is all too often dominated by the whips, what the Lords does, is prevent a one party state. That is, in so many respects, its biggest strength.

Tom Perrin: Why David Cameron should not be thinking about conducting a reshuffle

Tom Perrin is a student at Manchester Grammar School.

There has been much discussion recently over whether or not – and if so how – David Cameron will stage a reshuffle after the council elections and referendum. Much of the comment has been to the tune that reshuffling is a bad idea (as Paul Goodman has suggested). And I have to agree.

Reshuffles are, in many cases (and especially so just one year into a parliament) unnecessary, disruptive and expensive. This is for two key reasons.

Firstly, reshuffles create an image, to the public, of a government that is confused, falling apart and unable to function in its current form. (And surely this is even more dangerous in the case of a Coalition government).

Let us take two examples. Firstly Macmillan’s Night of the Long Knives, when seven cabinet ministers – including Selwyn Lloyd, then Chancellor of the Exchequer – were summoned to Downing Street and asked to relinquish their portfolios. Jeremy Thorpe, then a 30 year old MP for North Devon was quoted as adapting John 15:13 to aptly sum-up Macmillan’s purge of once loyal colleagues:

“Greater love hath no man than this, that he should lay down his friends for life”.

The second situation that comes to my mind is that of Gordon Brown’s mass reshuffle in June of 2009.

Tom Perrin: Any reforms to the House of Lords should now be subject to a referendum

Tom Perrin is a student at Manchester Grammar School and an active Conservative Party and Conservative Future member.

All the recent electoral reform ‘hoo-hah’ in the news seems to be related to the AV referendum. We do seem to be forgetting one key thing, however: that the Coalition (or Nick Clegg) will soon be unveiling plans to abolish the House of Lords and replace it with a fully, proportionally elected ‘senate’. 

This raised a key question for me, and I’m sure for many other Conservatives up and down the country – where’s the referendum, Mr. Clegg?

In the campaign for the Labour leadership, David Milliband suggested holding a referendum on both changes to the electoral system and the introduction of an elected second chamber on the same day.  Although it is hoped that the bulk of Conservatives would say ‘no’ to both these things, we have to ask ourselves why Mr. Clegg did not take up Mr Milliband’s suggestion. The simple answer is because Lords reform is more important than changes to the voting system for the Liberal Democrats – this is too big to lose. A fully elected second chamber is Nick Clegg’s baby – it would be his ‘moment in history’.

But why should the Coalition also hold a referendum on this very important issue? For two reasons: