Labour is planning to appoint a significant number of new peers in the coming weeks in order to support its policies and address the gender imbalance in the House of Lords. Despite the party's pledge to abolish the House of Lords, it is making these initial appointments to strengthen its presence in the chamber. Key figures within the Labour party have compiled a list of individuals to be appointed as peers, with the aim of bolstering their ranks and facilitating the implementation of their legislative agenda should they emerge victorious in the upcoming election on 4 July. Currently, the Conservatives hold 104 more seats in the House of Lords than Labour, and women make up less than a third of the total 784 members. This move by Labour reflects a strategic effort to ensure that their policies are effectively pushed through and to address the underrepresentation of women in the upper house of Parliament.

House Speaker Mike Johnson has appointed two staunch supporters of former President Donald Trump to the House of Representatives' intelligence committee, a move that is likely to stir controversy within the security establishment. Representatives Scott Perry of Pennsylvania and Ronny Jackson of Texas, both known for their unwavering loyalty to Trump and vocal advocacy for his efforts to challenge the outcome of the 2020 presidential election, were selected for the committee without consulting its chair, Mike Turner. This decision bypassed other qualified GOP members who may have been more traditionally aligned with the committee's work. The appointments of Perry and Jackson to such a sensitive committee raise concerns about the politicization of intelligence matters and the potential impact on national security. Their close ties to Trump suggest that their priorities may align more with political interests than with the committee's mandate to oversee intelligence activities and protect the country's security. The move is likely to face criticism from those who value the independence and non-partisan nature of intelligence oversight, as well as from those who question the qualifications and suitability of the appointees for such a critical role.