One considers itself to be “the mother” of democratic parliaments, the other is an Islamic theocracy. While Britain’s and Iran’s legislatures are vastly different, they do share something in common: clerics.
Twenty-six Church of England bishops and archbishops automatically sit in the British House of Lords, the UK’s unelected upper chamber, a centuries-old right that angers democracy campaigners and secularists.
Electoral reformers complain that the UK is the world’s sole democratic sovereign state to reserve legislative seats for religious representatives. They say that Iran is the only other country to do so.
The Anglican bishops were in the spotlight recently when they and fellow peers scrutinized Conservative British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak’s controversial plan to deport migrants to Rwanda, as they prepare to vote on the scheme soon.
Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby — the highest-ranking cleric in the Church of England, the leading church of global Anglicanism — warned that the proposal was leading the UK down a “damaging path.”
Speaking from the House of Lords’ distinctive red benches, Welby said Sunak’s contentious plan, decried by rights groups, would “outsource” the UK’s “legal and moral responsibilities for refugees and asylum seekers.”
His intervention in the highly charged political issue highlighted the presence of the Anglican leaders in the House of Lords, which dates back to medieval times and comes from the Church of England’s position as England’s establishment church.
The bishops are known as Lords Spiritual and have the same rights revising and voting on legislation as appointed life peers and hereditary peers, who together are called Lords Temporal.
“I think they see themselves as offering some sort of moral dimension,” said Daniel Gover, a politics expert at Queen Mary University of London.
The number of Lords Spiritual has fallen from about 90 in the 1300s to the 26 it has been capped at since 1847. Today, they represent just 3 percent of the House of Lords’ total membership of 785.
Five senior bishops and archbishops automatically receive spots, and the church selects the other 21.
They take on portfolios for specific policy areas that interest them and must retire when they are 70, unlike other peers. They have no party affiliation, so are not “whipped” into voting a certain way.
Richard Chapman, head of parliamentary affairs for the Church of England, said the bishops take their role “extremely seriously.”
“If they vote on an amendment to a bill it is because they want to improve it, or because there is some wider principle at stake,” he said.
It is “not because of a party political line or because they want to advance or set back the interest of this or that party.”
However, their presence is controversial.
Critics say that other British churches — like the protestant Church of Scotland — are not reserved seats.
Religious leaders can be appointed as secular peers, though.
Kathy Riddick of Humanists UK, a charity which promotes secularism, says the places are “out of step” with a modern Britain that is increasingly non-religious, and among those who do have a faith, non-Anglican.
“The only other sovereign state which awards clerics of the established religion votes in the legislature is Iran,” Riddick said.
More than 100 lawmakers and lords comprising the All-Party Parliamentary Humanist Group called in 2020 for the Church of England’s automatic representation to be repealed, while also making the comparison with Iran.
Gover stresses that the bishops’ limited influence is incomparable with the considerable power that Shiite clerics wield in Iran’s theocratic republic. The Lords Spiritual tend to have a relatively low attendance due to full-time roles running dioceses, and their votes rarely affect the final result.
“It’s clearly a very different type of representation,” Gover said.
The bishops have survived numerous attempts at reform, but another threat might come if the opposition Labour Party wins a general election later this year as expected.
Its leader Keir Starmer has called the upper chamber “undemocratic” and “indefensible,” and has said he would like to see it replaced with an elected “Assembly of the Nations and Regions.”
On May 7, 1971, Henry Kissinger planned his first, ultra-secret mission to China and pondered whether it would be better to meet his Chinese interlocutors “in Pakistan where the Pakistanis would tape the meeting — or in China where the Chinese would do the taping.” After a flicker of thought, he decided to have the Chinese do all the tape recording, translating and transcribing. Fortuitously, historians have several thousand pages of verbatim texts of Dr. Kissinger’s negotiations with his Chinese counterparts. Paradoxically, behind the scenes, Chinese stenographers prepared verbatim English language typescripts faster than they could translate and type them
More than 30 years ago when I immigrated to the US, applied for citizenship and took the 100-question civics test, the one part of the naturalization process that left the deepest impression on me was one question on the N-400 form, which asked: “Have you ever been a member of, involved in or in any way associated with any communist or totalitarian party anywhere in the world?” Answering “yes” could lead to the rejection of your application. Some people might try their luck and lie, but if exposed, the consequences could be much worse — a person could be fined,
Xiaomi Corp founder Lei Jun (雷軍) on May 22 made a high-profile announcement, giving online viewers a sneak peek at the company’s first 3-nanometer mobile processor — the Xring O1 chip — and saying it is a breakthrough in China’s chip design history. Although Xiaomi might be capable of designing chips, it lacks the ability to manufacture them. No matter how beautifully planned the blueprints are, if they cannot be mass-produced, they are nothing more than drawings on paper. The truth is that China’s chipmaking efforts are still heavily reliant on the free world — particularly on Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing
Last week, Nvidia chief executive officer Jensen Huang (黃仁勳) unveiled the location of Nvidia’s new Taipei headquarters and announced plans to build the world’s first large-scale artificial intelligence (AI) supercomputer in Taiwan. In Taipei, Huang’s announcement was welcomed as a milestone for Taiwan’s tech industry. However, beneath the excitement lies a significant question: Can Taiwan’s electricity infrastructure, especially its renewable energy supply, keep up with growing demand from AI chipmaking? Despite its leadership in digital hardware, Taiwan lags behind in renewable energy adoption. Moreover, the electricity grid is already experiencing supply shortages. As Taiwan’s role in AI manufacturing expands, it is critical that
RSS