House of Lords Appointments Commission: Role and powers

Approximate read time: 15 minutes

1. Key points

• HOLAC was established in 2000 as a non-statutory public body, and its powers and remit are set by the government.
• It vets all House of Lords nominations for propriety, focusing on whether nominees are in good standing and whether their past conduct could bring the House of Lords into disrepute.
• HOLAC also recommends new Crossbench peers based on applications it has received from members of the public. Only a small proportion of applicants are successful. Since 2000, 78 people recommended by HOLAC have become Crossbench peers.
• Since December 2024, HOLAC has also collected and published citations for successful political nominations.

2. What is the role of HOLAC?

HOLAC has two main functions. The first concerns appointments to the House of Lords in general. Life peerages are created by the sovereign on the advice of the prime minister. Prime ministers may make recommendations for political life peers (including ministerial appointments) and non-party political life peers, such as former high-ranking civil servants. By convention, prime ministers may take advice from other party leaders when recommending life peerages for individuals affiliated with opposition groups. HOLAC vets these nominations on the basis of their propriety and can advise and make recommendations to the prime minister concerning these appointments.

The second function is recommending new Crossbench peers. HOLAC can make recommendations for the appointment of new non-party political members of the House of Lords. These are appointed to sit in the House of Lords as Crossbench peers. Individuals can apply to HOLAC directly in order to be considered for appointment to the House of Lords in this way.

In addition to these two main functions, since December 2024, HOLAC has been responsible for collecting citations provided by the political parties when nominating appointments to the House of Lords.^[1]

HOLAC does not have a role concerning the total number of appointments or the overall size and composition of the House of Lords.

3. How was it established?

Prime Minister Tony Blair confirmed the establishment of the commission and its membership on 4 May 2000.^[2] It was created as an independent, advisory non-departmental public body (NDPB). NDPBs operate at arm’s length from ministers.^[3]The establishment of a non-statutory appointments commission was initially proposed in 1998 in the then Labour government’s white paper on House of Lords reform.^[4]

Unlike bodies such as the National Audit Office, the Electoral Commission and the Judicial Appointments Commission, HOLAC was not created through statute. Because HOLAC is not a statutory body, its remit can be changed by the government without amending legislation. For example, after the May 2010 general election, the then new coalition government expanded HOLAC’s remit by asking it to vet individuals who were to be appointed to the House of Lords as ministers.^[5]

4. Who are its members?

The current chair is Baroness Deech (Crossbench). She was appointed as chair in 2023. Previous chairs have been:

• Lord Stevenson of Coddenham (Crossbench), from 2000 to 2008
• Lord Jay of Ewelme (Crossbench), from 2008 to 2013
• Lord Kakkar (Crossbench), from 2013 to 2018
• Lord Bew (Crossbench), from 2018 to 2023

There are six other members.^[6] Of these, three places are reserved for political parties (Conservative, Labour, and Liberal Democrat) and selected from members of the House of Lords. The remaining three members are non-party political. Members of the Lords have been non-party political members of the commission in the past. However, none of the current non-party political members of the commission sit in the Lords.

5. How many non-party political members have been recommended by HOLAC?

Since its creation, the commission has recommended a total of 78 individuals for appointment to the House of Lords as Crossbench peers. Most of these were during its first 10 years. Between 2000 and 2010, a total of 57 members were recommended by HOLAC and were appointed to the House of Lords.^[7] Since 2010, 21 members have been recommended and appointed.

Only a small proportion of those who nominate themselves for appointment as non-party political members are successful. For example, between the start of 2010 and the end of 2023, there were 1,516 applications, 108 per year on average.^[8] There were only 23 successful appointments during this period. HOLAC chair Baroness Deech said in 2024 that just over 1% of the people who apply to HOLAC for appointment have become members of the Lords.^[9]

Figure 1. Crossbench peers appointments announced by year recommended by the House of Lords Appointments Commission, 2000 to present

In 2012, then prime minister David Cameron asked HOLAC to limit the number of individuals it recommended to two per year.^[10] In 2018, it confirmed it would continue to limit the number of people it recommended for appointments.^[11] The commission said it had made this decision in the light of the recommendations made by the Lord Speaker’s committee on the size of the House.^[12] This report recommended the overall size of the House of Lords should be capped at 600 members. To achieve this, it recommended there should be only one new appointment for every two vacancies created.

Speaking during an oral evidence session with the House of Commons Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee in March 2024, Baroness Deech said she would like to increase the number of Crossbench peers appointed each year to more than two.^[13] However, she said this could not be achieved without addressing the issue of the overall size of the House.^[14]

In July 2026, the lord speaker, Lord Forsyth of Drumlean, also argued the restriction on the number of HOLAC appointments should be revisited.^[15] He argued one of the reasons for increasing the number of these appointments was to address the increase in the proportion of members of the House who were party political appointees. This proportion increased because of the removal of the hereditary peers by the House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Act 2026.^[16] He argued that to avoid a rapid expansion in the size of the House, this would need to be accompanied by either voluntary restraint on the part of the prime minister or a statutory restriction on the number of party political appointments that can be made.

Crossbench peers may also be nominated directly by the prime minister. Between 2000 and 2025, 71 crossbench peers were nominated directly, in addition to those nominated by HOLAC. These nominations are vetted by HOLAC in the same way as nominations made by the political parties. In June 2026, the then prime minister, Sir Keir Starmer, issued a statement specifying these appointments are made “based on their public service” and include “both distinguished public servants on retirement and individuals with a proven track record of service to the public”.^[17] There is no limit on the number of these appointments. However, the convention has been for prime ministers to make up to 10 such appointments during a parliament.^[18] Additional appointments were made in 2026 to enable nine hereditary Crossbench peers to remain in the House of Lords following the passing of the House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Act 2026.^[19]

6. How does it vet nominations to the House of Lords?

HOLAC only vets nominations for propriety. It does not have the power to vet nominations for other qualities such as suitability. It has published the following definition of what ‘propriety’ constitutes in this context:

[…] propriety means:

i) The individual should be in good standing in the community in general and with the public regulatory authorities in particular; and

ii) The past conduct of the nominee would not reasonably be regarded as bringing the House of Lords into disrepute.^[20]

There have been calls for the remit of HOLAC to be expanded. For example, in 2024, the Institute for Government, the Constitution Unit at University College London and the UK Governance Project published a joint report which included a recommendation that the prime minister should enable HOLAC to consider the suitability of candidates in addition to their propriety.^[21] In July 2026, Lord Forsyth also argued that the existing powers of HOLAC to vet appointments should be expanded beyond the current tests for propriety.^[22] He suggested HOLAC’s role could include establishing whether the nominee was “willing and able” to contribute to the work of the House.^[23] He made several other recommendations. For example, he said either HOLAC or a new nominating body should make recommendations for new appointments based on gaps it had identified in the expertise of the House of Lords.

HOLAC does not have a stated position on whether its vetting powers should be expanded. Baroness Deech said that she as chair would “personally welcome” HOLAC being given the power to consider the suitability of party nominees more generally as part of the vetting process.^[24] However, she also acknowledged there were “different views round the table” on this.^[25]

HOLAC has said political parties should address the issue of suitability before a nomination is made to HOLAC to vet. In October 2022, then HOLAC chair Lord Bew wrote to the leaders of the political parties noting they had a role in judging the suitability of nominations.^[26] In this letter he asked party leaders to consider the seven principles of public life, also known as the Nolan principles, when making nominations.^[27] He also said HOLAC was becoming “increasingly uncomfortable about the limits of its role” when vetting nominations in instances where issues of suitability had not been addressed appropriately beforehand.^[28]

Baroness Deech sent a similar letter to party leaders in March 2024 following her appointment as HOLAC chair.^[29] As well as asking party leaders to consider the principles of public life when making nominations, she said they should provide HOLAC with an assurance that those nominated had “demonstrated past conduct consistent with the duties of a member of the House of Lords”. She also said party leaders should require nominees to give an assurance they understood the role and requirements of membership of the Lords.

In June 2025, Sir Keir Starmer issued a statement on the process for making nominations to the House of Lords.^[30] This did not expand the remit of HOLAC. However, it set out which matters should be considered when political nominations are made, including “whether nominees have the skills, ability and willingness to contribute to the work of the House and a commitment to high standards in public life”.^[31]

6.1 Citations for political nominations

Prior to December 2024, there was no requirement for the political parties to publish the reasons why someone had been nominated to the House of Lords. Following a successful request made under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, two citations held by HOLAC submitted as part of Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s 2022 resignation honours list were published in January 2025.^[32] The redacted citations for Ross Kempsell and Charlotte Owen were published by the journalist Martin Rosenbaum on his website on 9 January 2025.^[33] In an interview in October 2024, Boris Johnson described the treatment of Baroness Owen as “absolutely shameful”.^[34] No other citations made before December 2024 are in the public domain.

In December 2024, the government announced that political parties would be required to provide citations for new appointments to the House of Lords.^[35] It said these citations should summarise the reasons why that party had put forward an individual. It also confirmed the citations would be published for those new peers whose nominations were successful. The first citations were published on 20 December 2024 alongside the announcement of 38 new peerages.^[36]

The government also announced that HOLAC would be responsible for collecting these citations.^[37] In December 2024, HOLAC published guidance for the political parties on what should be included in these citations.^[38] Specifically, the guidance said the citations should summarise in no more than 150 words why an individual had been nominated. It also said the purpose of these citations should be to provide greater transparency to the public as to why nominations had been made.

While it would be taking on this new role, HOLAC emphasised in its guidance that vetting the suitability of nominations remained outside its remit. It also said it would not assess the quality of the citations submitted by the parties.

7. Is HOLAC’s advice always followed?

The prime minister makes the final decision on whether to recommend to the King that someone be given a life peerage. There has only been one occasion since the establishment of HOLAC when this advice has been accepted.^[39] In December 2020, a life peerage was announced for Peter Cruddas, a businessperson, philanthropist and Conservative Party donor and former co-treasurer.^[40] Prior to his nomination, HOLAC said it could not support Mr Cruddas’ peerage. However, prime minister Boris Johnson decided the life peerage should go ahead. In his letter to Lord Bew, he said Mr Cruddas had made “outstanding contributions” to the business and charitable sectors.^[41] Lord Cruddas joined the House of Lords on 27 January 2021.

In a subsequent letter to the House of Commons Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee, Lord Bew confirmed HOLAC had been unable to support individuals nominated by the parties on previous occasions.^[42] However, he said this was the first time HOLAC’s advice had not been followed. Subsequently, HOLAC confirmed it had not supported eight of the nominees put forward as part of Mr Johnson’s resignations honours list.^[43] This advice was accepted by then prime minister Rishi Sunak and these individuals were not included in the final resignation honours list.^[44]

8. Should HOLAC be reformed?

Since its establishment, there have been calls for HOLAC to be placed on a statutory basis. For example, in 2000, the Royal Commission on the Reform of the House of Lords recommended it should become a statutory body to avoid its role being altered or abolished without reference to Parliament.^[45] In 2012, the Joint Committee on the Draft House of Lords Reform Bill also recommended HOLAC should be placed on a statutory basis.^[46] However, the subsequent House of Lords Reform Bill was not passed.

In 2025, the House of Lords Constitution Committee recommended the government should review whether the role of HOLAC should be set out in statute.^[47] It argued a new statutory remit could clarify the prime minister’s constitutional responsibilities when it came to creating new peerages. The government did not refer to HOLAC specifically in its response to the committee’s report.^[48] Instead, it said it was committed to “keeping our ethics bodies under review”.^[49]

Several private members’ bills have been introduced proposing changes to the powers and role of HOLAC. For example, during the 2022–23 session, Lord Norton of Louth (Conservative) introduced the House of Lords (Peerage Nominations) Bill [HL], a private member’s bill to put HOLAC on a statutory basis.^[50] The bill would also have strengthened HOLAC’s role in the appointments process. This bill did not progress beyond second reading.^[51] Lord Norton introduced a similar bill during the 2024–26 session.^[52] This also did not progress beyond second reading.^[53]

During her evidence session with the House of Commons Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee in March 2024, Baroness Deech described the current basis for the establishment of HOLAC as “rather flimsy”.^[54] She said HOLAC had not formed a view on whether it should be established on a statutory basis but she said her personal view was there was “some merit” in this course of action.^[55] However, she also said she believed it was unlikely that a prime minister would be willing to lose their final say on who should become a member of the Lords.

Labour said in its manifesto it would reform the House of Lords appointments process to “ensure the quality of new appointments”. However, it did not include any specific commitments concerning reforming HOLAC.^[56] In December 2024, the government said it would keep the appointments system under review as it moved forward with “wider reforms” to the House of Lords.^[57]

8. Read more

• House of Lords Library, ‘House of Lords reform: Government policy and recent developments’, 6 November 2024
• House of Lords Library, ‘Vetting appointments to the House of Lords’, 28 February 2022
• House of Lords Library, ‘House of Lords (Peerage Nominations) Bill [HL]: HL Bill 19 of 2022–23’, 2 August 2022
• House of Lords Library, ‘House of Lords appointments: Should the process be reviewed?’, 12 November 2021
• House of Lords Library, ‘Reforming the House of Lords Appointments Commission’, 20 August 2021

---

Image: Copyright House of Lords 2026. This briefing was updated on 15 September 2026.