Lords could be renamed in overhaul by Labour

THE House of Lords could be renamed, restructured and ultimately include a majority of directly elected members under plans being discussed within the Labour Party.

The proposals being considered by senior Labour figures would see life peers gradually being excluded from an upper chamber that would be drastically reduced from its current 731 members to no more than 400.

And in what would be a fundamental break with 700 years of constitutional tradition, some members of the second chamber would be elected directly by the electorate to serve six-year terms.

In the first instance, 20 per cent of the chamber would be elected, rising to 40 per cent, 60 per cent and finally 80 per cent, though that point would only be reached after 18 years and several reviews of the reform process.

Labour is already committed to removing the 92 remaining hereditary aristocrats entitled to sit in the Lords, but its discussion paper also proposes a symbolic break with the past, renaming the House of Lords by giving it the bland title "the second chamber".

The new body would be a mix of elected members and those appointed by churches and faith groups, and interested parties including trade unions, business lobbies, charities and professions including lawyers and doctors.

All appointments to the chamber would be vetted by an independent panel, potentially removing the important power of patronage from the government.

The plans, drawn up by a party policy committee chaired by Charles Clarke, the Home Secretary, and Charlie Falconer, the Lord Chancellor, are among a range of constitutional options being studied by members of Labour's National Policy Forum.

However, the radical plans for direct election to the second chamber may face resistance from figures including Tony Blair. The Prime Minister is known to worry that a directly elected upper house would be a potential rival to the Commons, which could result in damaging power-struggles.

Labour's election manifesto this year committed the party to "review" the role and functions of the Lords, but cast doubt on direct elections. "A reformed upper chamber must be effective, legitimate and more representative, without challenging the primacy of the House of Commons," the manifesto says.

David Heath, the Liberal Democrat spokesman on constitutional reform, yesterday said although Labour's willingness to change was welcome, the reforms must be more radical and be implemented much sooner.

"While it is a positive sign that proposals are emerging from the Labour Party to complete Lords reform, the suggestions published appear muddled, inconsistent and unlikely to command a majority in both Houses," he said.

"By taking such a gradual approach, the Labour Party is condemning us to decades of further constitutional reform, rather than dealing with what is now an urgent piece of business.

"We are clear that a reformed House of Lords needs to be predominantly elected on a fair system of voting, and we urge the government to recognise that this is the only acceptable way forward."

Labour insisted the Lords document was a "discussion paper" only and did not represent the views of either the government or the party.