Do ideas matter? peers and reform of the House of Lords

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.