Member News
Lord Tyler, the Liberal Democrat constitutional affairs spokesman in the Lords, writes for ePolitix.com ahead of a Lords debate on legislative proposals for constitutional renewal.
As the expenses scandal raged, ministers and their Conservative 'shadows' leapt to talk about constitutional reform as the antidote to the political problems MPs - and the institution of Parliament - faced in light of the Daily Telegraph's revelations.
Reform has throughout Brown's premiership acted as a sort of rhetorical JCB - there to dig ministers out of holes - and not much else.
By contrast to the other parties, Liberal Democrats have set out a comprehensive programme to overhaul Britain's creaking constitution from top to toe. We have not fallen back on the politicians' age-old escape chute of calling for a review, and commuting political decisions to independent commissions. We have instead set out a 100-day schedule to bring power back from the executive to Parliament, and to the people. A part of it is my own Constitutional Renewal Bill, which I published earlier this year in frustration at the government’s consistent failure to bring forward their own Bill and at the feebleness of the draft they produced in July last year.
My Bill would pave the way for electoral reform in Britain by, first, fixing the dates on which elections are held – at strict four year intervals – and then providing for a 'Citizens' Assembly' to determine the voting system which should be used for elections to the House of Commons. This would not be just another committee or commission of the great and the good but a genuinely public process, effectively subjecting our present system – and the alternatives – to a real jury trial. The electoral system is the engine of our democracy, and it needs a serious overhaul, not by the self-interested political classes, but by the public. The Assembly's conclusions would be put to a national referendum, so that any new system had broad support from the population at large.
The legislation would also implement Gordon Brown's July 2007 commitment to 'surrender of limit' the royal prerogative powers, by enshrining in statute the right for Parliament to ratify international treaties and to give prior approval when the government commits British troops to armed conflict. Part four of my Bill brings to fruition the recommendations of the Northcote-Trevelyan report of 1854, and Brown's own 2007 promise, to place the independence of the civil service on a statutory footing. We would also limit the number of political 'special advisers' – Damian McBride and his colleagues – to make more of the advice given to ministers based on civil service knowledge than on advisers' political beliefs.
The Bill follows the lead of various cross-party committee reports from both Houses, by separating the office of Attorney General from any ministerial role. The Attorney's position has been undermined by a series of cases in which his or her advice appears to have been based on political imperatives rather than sound legal practice. Allegations that legal advice about military action in Iraq was altered to suit the political case for war, and that the Attorney General could have intervened to stop prosecutions in the 'cash for honours' scandal, have proved particularly damaging.
Finally, the Bill introduces effective discipline for members of both Houses of Parliament, if they fall below strict standards set out in a code of conduct. This is the measure that may go some way to tackling the issues raised by the toxic expenses episode.
The other measures in the Bill have been urgent for years, and our debate in the Lords on Thursday will challenge the government to live up to its promises. For better or worse, Brown has nine months left to govern. As it is, he has the lightest legislative programme in modern times, truly a government which is clinging to office but has no idea what to do with its power. My Bill gives the PM an opportunity to leave a lasting legacy – not of crisis and of failure – but of real democratic reforms that, once enacted, not even the Conservatives would dare repeal.
Dods Parliamentary Communications Ltd