TY - JOUR
T1 - Do ideas matter? peers and reform of the House of Lords
AU - Reid, Richard
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2015 Taylor & Francis.
PY - 2015/10/2
Y1 - 2015/10/2
N2 - The opposition of peers to an elected House of Lords has often been explained as based on self-interest. Building on evidence from interviews with 77 members of the House of Lords, this article argues that there is more to this opposition. Through an application of Craig Parsons’ concept of the cross-cutting issue, this article posits that ideas are central to understanding the position of peers to reform of the House of Lords. Beyond this particular case, this article also provides support for the explanatory gains that can be garnered from non-rational accounts of continuity and change.
AB - The opposition of peers to an elected House of Lords has often been explained as based on self-interest. Building on evidence from interviews with 77 members of the House of Lords, this article argues that there is more to this opposition. Through an application of Craig Parsons’ concept of the cross-cutting issue, this article posits that ideas are central to understanding the position of peers to reform of the House of Lords. Beyond this particular case, this article also provides support for the explanatory gains that can be garnered from non-rational accounts of continuity and change.
KW - House of Lords reform
KW - cross-cutting issue
KW - ideas and interests
KW - ideational analysis
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84945469385&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/14662043.2015.1089005
DO - 10.1080/14662043.2015.1089005
M3 - Article
SN - 1466-2043
VL - 53
SP - 497
EP - 515
JO - Commonwealth and Comparative Politics
JF - Commonwealth and Comparative Politics
IS - 4
ER -