We've been here before. Since the 1960s, Labor governments have tried to pass laws to end peer shows. And yet their lordships survived.
The latest step towards reform of Parliament's upper house came as MPs debated the House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill, which seeks to expel 92 peers who had inherited their seats.
Live Politics: The Prime Minister met Taylor Swift at a concert after receiving a free ticket
Good luck, as they say. Yes, Sir Keir Starmer has a clear majority in the House of Commons. Tony Blair did the same, but his attempts to reform the House of Lords were doomed to failure and ended in farce and chaos.
This second reading debate began with a speech by Paymaster-General Nick Thomas-Symonds, who quoted Harold Wilson – about whom he wrote an acclaimed biography – in proposing reform of the Lords in 1968.
Thomas-Symonds made no mention of the 2003 fiasco when MPs voted to reject all five options – or were there six? – in the case of the reform proposed by Robin Cook, including total abolition of the death penalty, 100% elected, 80% elected and 60% elected.
So we have another proposal to remove hereditary partners. But that's all. Labour's manifesto, which included a pledge to force colleagues to retire at 80, has mysteriously – but critics say wisely – been shelved.
This is hardly surprising. At the same moment that the over 80-year-old's proposal was revealed, Sir Keir Starmer elevated Grand Dames Margaret Becket (81) and Margaret Hodge (80) to the House of Lords.
Given their marching orders from the Labor benches in the House of Lords would be national treasures: Joan Bakewell (91), Alf Dubs (also 91) and Robert Winston. Shocking age discrimination!
– What about the king?
Mr. Thomas-Symonds is smart. However, during his speech, he immediately ran into trouble from some old laggards on the opposition benches as he tried to explain the government's reasoning.
What about the king, asked Sir John Hayes. After all, it is hereditary. What about Catholic bishops, asked Sir Edward Leigh. Why not abolish the House of Lords altogether, demanded the SNP's Pete Wishart.
From the Opposition Front Bench, former Deputy Prime Minister Sir Oliver Dowden delivered a witty speech which he admitted was his “swan song” as he did not expect to be in the new Tory leader's shadow cabinet.
Shame! “Olive,” as his Tory friends call him, has something of a pantomime dame about him. Without him, the Tory front bench will be less colorful and witty, as he showed in this speech.
“The Labor Party,” Sir Oliver said with a smile, “reeks of hereditary principles. The elevation of Nepo's children in north London, the coronation of the red princes…
“The Falcons, the Kinnocks, the Benns, the Eagles, the Reeves, many of them are distinguished members, but under the closed shop of the Labor Party it is a hereditary peek, a hereditary MP.”
Read more:
What are Labour's fiscal rules?
What tax increases could Labor introduce in the budget?
After some good-natured banter during its second reading in the House of Commons, Mr Thomas-Symonds's bill is certain to see countless amendments as it goes through its next stages in the House of Commons and the House of Lords.
Sir Oliver claimed the bill had already been criticized by Labor greats David Blunkett, Peter Mandelson and Andrew Adonis. Can they cause trouble for the government in the House of Lords?
This second reading debate confirmed what we already knew from Robin Cook's humiliation in 2003, that there is no consensus in Parliament on reforming the House of Lords, and probably never will be.
And that's why the end of the peer program is almost certainly still a long way off.
