The Liberal Democrats have outlined their proposals to reform the House of Lords, calling for legislation to be passed in 2007.

The party said there should be 450 members of the second chamber, with 360 elected and 90 appointed.

And the House of Lords would be renamed the Senate in 2011, with all hereditary peers leaving by that date.

Elections would take place by thirds every four years using the single transferable vote system, with the first elections in 2011.

"There is now a real chance that for the first time Britain can have a truly democratic second chamber free from patronage and sleaze," said constitutional affairs spokesman Simon Hughes.

The Lib Dem proposals come as all-party talks on plans to reform the second chamber continue.

Other proposals announced on Friday include ending automatic places for Church of England bishops and giving the appointments commission the responsibility for ensuring suitable faith representation.

The Parliament Act would also be extended to allow legislation introduced in the Senate to be forced through.

And both houses would be permitted to amend secondary legislation, scrutinise European legislation and approve treaties.

"There is a broad political consensus that the upper house does not have too many powers," added Hughes.

"It is now time for the Lords to end and a modern Senate, much more representative of the country, to take over."

Lord McNally, Lib Dem leader in the upper house, said: "Our proposals are a genuine attempt at cross party co-operation.

"We are offering the government a chance to agree across parties a root and branch reform of the House of Lords, based on democratic principles.

"The time has come to ask the House of Commons to reach a clear and settled view on the composition of the upper house."

The party rejected suggestions that its proposals could undermine the pre-eminence of the Commons.

"We believe that the second chamber should complement not rival the Commons," said the Lib Dem paper.

"We consider that the Commons' present pre-eminence is not just based on its electoral mandate but on the principle that a government requires the confidence of the Commons but not necessarily of the Lords.

"It is from the fully-elected Commons that the government gains and retains its authority, by established practice that the prime minister and senior ministers are drawn from its membership, and it is to the Commons that ministers are principally accountable.

"The primacy of the House of Commons is underpinned, in any event, by the Parliament Acts, and we would not consider any need to change substantially these Acts for a reformed second chamber.

"We consider that, irrespective of the reform agenda, the Parliament Acts could be extended to cover bills which start in the Lords as well as those which start in the Commons.

"Quite apart from the logic of this position, it could also encourage governments to introduce more bills in the second chamber, reducing congestion in the legislative process."