Elections to the Lords in four years but reform is savaged

Published on Tuesday 17 May 2011 20:09

Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg has set out plans for the first elections to the House of Lords to take place in 2015, but was given a clear message by government backbenchers that his flagship reform of the Upper Chamber will meet serious opposition.

Mr Clegg unveiled his white paper in the Commons yesterday to create a more democratic Lords and end 100 years of wrangling over whether the House should be elected.

But, buoyed by their victory in the Alternative Vote referendum, Tory backbenchers were in no mood to accept reform with many complaining that the issue was "a personal obsession" of Mr Clegg's which did not concern ordinary members of the public.

There was also concern that the new members of the Lords would have 15-year jobs and get more than an MSP, currently on 57,521, with no right of recall.

Under the House of Lords Reform Bill, its membership would be slashed to 300, with 80 per cent elected via the single transferable vote, a form of proportional representation.

The other 20 per cent of members, totalling 60, would be appointed and sit as crossbenchers. Church of England bishops would continue to sit in the Lords, although their numbers would be cut from 26 to 12.

But, faced with a wide range of views in the Commons and strong opposition in the Lords itself, Mr Clegg stressed that the government would be "open-minded" and "pragmatic" about the details.

The draft bill was published alongside a white paper containing options for reform - including Mr Clegg's preferred choice of a 100 per cent elected Lords. Both are to be scrutinised by a cross-party committee of MPs and peers over the next year.

In a show of unity Mr Clegg was flanked by Tory Prime Minister David Cameron.

Mr Clegg told MPs: "The Prime Minister and I are clear - we want the first elections to the reformed upper chamber to take place in 2015.

"But, while we know what we want to achieve, we are open-minded about how we get there.

"Clearly our fixed goal is greater democratic legitimacy for the other place, but we will be pragmatic in order to achieve it."

RELATED

• New-look chamber would feature 15-year terms

• Background: Seat of wealth and power

• Analysis: Not bad for a first stab, but coalition faces the same problems as its predecessors

Mr Clegg admitted having been forced to compromise on a fully-elected chamber. He said: "Personally I have always supported 100 per cent elected, but the key thing is not to make the best the enemy of the good.

"That approach has stymied Lords reform for too long. Surely, at the end of the day, we can all agree that 80 per cent is better than 0 per cent."

Shadow justice secretary Sadiq Khan questioned why Mr Clegg was pushing the 80 per cent elected option despite the Liberal Democrat manifesto pledge - like Labour's - for a wholly elected Lords.

He said: "These proposals risk being a dog's dinner with nobody happy at the outcome, not even the Lib Dem activists he is trying to appease."

But there was concern about losing expertise in the Lords if the chamber became wholly elected.

Baroness D'Souza, the convenor of crossbench peers, said an elected Lords would not be able to do the work as well as the current chamber.

"I would be much more in favour of abolishing the House of Lords altogether and appointing external scrutiny committees than having an elected chamber," she said.

The backlash against the reform in the Commons was led by Scottish Tory MP Eleanor Laing, who represents Epping Forest, in England.

She asked for an explanation about how the "balance of power" would change between the two Houses, when "an elected second chamber competes with this House and the Members of this House for democratic legitimacy".

Mr Clegg received so many hostile questions from the government benches that veteran Labour MP David Winnick noted: "I cannot recall less enthusiasm from the government benches for a proposal brought forward by a minister."There was also scepticism from the Labour benches, with former minister Kate Hoey accusing Mr Clegg of pursuing a personal agenda "that is never mentioned on the doorsteps by constituents".

Former home secretary David Blunkett was sceptical about the 15-year terms with no right of recall by the electorate.

He asked: "How does an election system that leads the electorate not to understand who they've elected add to legitimacy, and how is accountability aided by a 15-year non-renewable term, where there is no recall?

"Isn't it simply true that a mandate given to a second House will reduce the mandate of this House?"