End the ‘posh sexism’ that stops women inheriting aristocratic titles

We are blessed to live in the 70th year of the new Elizabethan era. This Platinum Jubilee, we can all see how Her Majesty, as a female monarch, has served our country in a fashion unsurpassed by any male monarch in our history.

In 2013, Parliament changed the succession to the Crown by law so that, henceforth, the first-born child of the monarch should be next in line to inherit the throne, whether a boy or girl. It means that Prince George’s first child will be King or Queen in their time.

And yet institutional – indeed constitutional – sexism continues to this day in the House of Lords, where one eighth of the seats are reserved for men only. The 92 hereditary peerages – made up of dukes, marquesses, earls, viscounts, barons, baronesses and countesses – are nearly always passed down through the male line and another man is elected by an all-male electorate.

Whatever your view on whether hereditary peers should remain in the House of Lords, we need to reform this sexist aspect right away. I will not rest until this posh glass ceiling is broken.

The campaign to end male primogeniture in the House of Lords has been progressing for over 100 years. My own effort, introducing a Private Members’ Bill last month, has cross-party support and I know that the Government is listening. Now we are in a new session of Parliament, I hope an MP who won a Private Members’ Bill lottery ticket in last week’s ballot will take on this important cause. And I hope that the Government will support it all the way through.

Constitutional sexism is completely indefensible and has terrible real-world consequences. It is Parliamentary misogyny baked right into the institution.

Only 13 per cent of the land in the UK is owned by women. Boys are twice as likely as girls to inherit family businesses. If we can’t level up the top of society, then we will never be able to change inequality for the whole of society.

Put simply, daughters should be treated the same as sons across our country. If it’s good enough for the succession to the Crown it should be good enough for everyone else, and the hereditary peerages in the House of Lords should go automatically to the eldest child. At the moment, this very rarely happens.

The matter is further complicated by the current case of Matilda Simon, born Matthew Simon, who has applied to contest the next by-election for hereditary peers, in the hope of taking the hereditary seat as Baron Simon of Wythenshawe. Matilda, Lord Simon. Their Lordships, in their fusty chamber, were hoping this moment would never happen. In an effort to stop daughters transitioning to sons and “leapfrogging” the male heirs, they exempted themselves from the Gender Recognition Act.

So Matilda Simon is entitled to take her seat in the House of Lords, subject to the normal election processes, but only because she is a man. To complicate matters, as Lord Matilda has an older sister and is the second daughter, she wouldn’t have been eligible because her sister Margaret would have inherited.

As only the 341st female Member of Parliament, I want to see a 50-50 Parliament in my lifetime. I know the Prime Minister wants it too. My campaign is not a dramatic reform, and would not be implemented retrospectively.

Yet since it is right for the Royal family, it must be right for hereditary titles too. Let’s seize the chance to end this constitutional sexism now.