Lib-Lab clash over Lords reform

The Liberal Democrats have branded Labour's proposed reforms to the House of Lords as "muddled and inconsistent".

Under government proposals, the Lords would be renamed the "second chamber" with, eventually, up to 80 per cent of members being elected.

 

But Liberal Democrat Commons spokesman David Heath attacked the plans as "muddled, inconsistent and unlikely to command a majority in both houses".

 

In the plans being sent to Labour national policy forum members, newly created life peers would lose the right to sit in the second chamber, which would be cut from 731 to between 300 and 400 members serving six-year terms.

 

Drawn up by a committee chaired by home secretary Charles Clarke and lord chancellor Lord Falconer, the proposals suggest that existing life peers have the option of retiring but would not be forced to quit because of fears that they would have to be paid compensation.

 

Labour proposes that 20 per cent of the second chamber be elected at first, moving to a maximum of 80 per cent following reviews to ensure the chamber was not becoming too powerful.

 

The last attempt to reform the Lords ended in stalemate in the Commons, with MPs failing to decisively back any of the proposals.

 

Heath warned that the new plans could also end in failure.

 

"Whilst 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."