Purchase today

Enter your email address here to receive updates from the team.

Jobs

User login

The Staggers

The New Statesman’s rolling politics blog

RSS

Clegg backs down on House of Lords reform

Deputy PM fails to secure a fully elected upper house and agrees that the bishops will remain.

By George Eaton Published 04 April 2011 14:00

Nick Clegg has been outmanoeuvred again, this time on House of Lords reform. The Deputy Prime Minister had hoped to establish a fully elected second chamber, but has settled for (£) one that is 80 per cent elected and 20 per cent appointed. He has also agreed to reserve some places for the Anglican bishops, 26 of whom sit in the house. We will remain the only semi-theocracy in the western world.

The coalition agreement held open the possibility of a fully elected upper house. It said: "We will establish a committee to bring forward proposals for a wholly or mainly elected upper chamber on the basis of proportional representation."

In response, we can expect Labour, which failed to deliver even a partially elected Lords, to attack Clegg's compromise. Ed Miliband offered a preview of this strategy in his recent speech at the launch of the Labour Yes Campaign.

He said: "We need a reformed, democratic House of Lords. Labour and the Lib Dems called for a fully elected second chamber in our manifesto. I want to keep that promise." Clegg has also agreed to abandon a proposed ban on former ministers and MPs sitting in the Lords.

The Times reports that a "committee of both Houses will be set up before the summer recess to consider the plans and will report next year". Should the Yes camp lose the AV referendum, David Cameron will almost certainly offer Lords reform to Clegg as a consolation prize. But he will have to contend with a Tory party that, with honourable exceptions, remains hostile to reform and, of course, the Lords itself.

Special Offer: Get 12 issues of New Statesman magazine for just £12

Tags: Nick Clegg

More from George Eaton

View the discussion thread.

14 comments

Mon, 2011-04-04 14:28 — Robert Taggart

NC - ALARMING !

Mon, 2011-04-04 14:42 — zahidf (not verified)

'But he will have to contend with a Tory Party that, with honourable exceptions, remains hostile to reform and, of course, the Lords itself.'

You could replace 'Tory' with 'Labour' here.

And What Clegg is proposing is more substantional that anything Labour tried in the last 13 years. How about acknowledging that?

Mon, 2011-04-04 14:45 — Gerry Tierney (not verified)

Lame duck.

Mon, 2011-04-04 14:46 — Mel Davis (not verified)

I've started calling him 'Nick Clogg'. He could have been an adored and decent man (as I thought he was until after last election)even a PM one day; unfortunately, he has shown himself up the snake he really is. Duplicitous and ambitious to selling himself and us down the river. I want nothing to do with him ever again.

Wed, 2011-04-06 17:25 — Garry Otton (not verified)

The UK is the only semi-elected theocracy in the Western world. Thanks Nick Clegg. You should've held firm!

Mon, 2011-04-04 15:15 — damianneum

zahdif: I did point out that Labour "failed to deliver even a partially elected Lords".

Mon, 2011-04-04 15:16 — Mark McGeoghegan (not verified)

@zahidf

Anything Labour did to the Lords, or constitutional reform in general? I ask because devolution is without doubt a hell of a lot more substantial than brokering a deal that leaves religion with a role in our government.

Mon, 2011-04-04 15:22 — swatantra

Labour got them down to a meaningful 92, now Cleggs down another u turn. Shame on you. I'm still infavour of 80:20 elected to appointed, which is about right.

Mon, 2011-04-04 15:23 — zahidf (not verified)

You pointed it out, i guess it's mainly the headline. A 80% elected Lords, if it gets through, is a lot better than what labour managed, and is hard to see that as a 'failure'.

Mon, 2011-04-04 15:53 — swatantra

You honestly don't think the Lords could be abolished at one stroke, do you? No, Labour did exceedingly well by breaking the mould in reducing it down to 92 full time servers. Next stage is 80:20, and then posibly 3rd stage, all fully elected.
But I'm hoping it won't be fully elected. How else are the likes of you and me ever going to get in?

Tue, 2011-04-05 20:19 — Degsy (not verified)

andrew holden: would the semi-theocracy tag be unwarranted if 49% of the membership were Bishops of a single denomination of a single religion, on the basis that they'd also have to persuade at least some of their contemporaries by rational argument?

Reserved places in a legislative chamber, as of right, to representatives of a single theological standpoint are an anathema to any democrat. If Clegg has really given up the ghost on this then his goose is cooked within the Party.

Mon, 2011-04-04 17:18 — Andrew_Holden

"Semi-theocracy" is not only an unwarranted but also an inaccurate slur. A handful of Bishops, even in the unlikely event that they agreed what God's will was, still have to persuade their peers to vote along with them by recourse to rational argument.

If electing the Lords means we end up with a second chamber of self-interested and self-serving politicians then it's a bad idea. Appointing people of proven worth to act as a reforming foil to the faults of elected government is much more preferable - even if some clerics are included.

Mon, 2011-04-04 17:35 — Dave C (not verified)

Liberal Democrat 2010 manifesto: http://network.libdems.org.uk/manifesto2010/libdem_manifesto_2010.pdf

"Replace the House of Lords with a fully-elected second chamber with considerably fewer members than the current House"

Labour 2010 manifesto: http://www.labour.org.uk/uploads/TheLabourPartyManifesto-2010.pdf

"We will let the people decide how to reform our institutions and our politics: changing the voting system and electing a second chamber to
replace the House of Lords."

...

"To begin the task of building a new politics, we will let the British people decide on whether to make Parliament more democratic and
accountable in referenda on reform of the House of Commons and House of Lords, to be held on the same day, by
October 2011."

"We will ensure that the hereditary principle is removed from the House of Lords. Further democratic reform to create a fully elected Second
Chamber will then be achieved in stages. At the end of the next Parliament one third of the House of Lords will be elected; a further one third of members will be elected at the general election after that. Until the final stage, the representation of all groups should be maintained in equal proportions to now. We will consult widely on these
proposals, and on an open-list
proportional representation electoral system for the Second Chamber, before putting them to the people in a referendum."

Given the Greens, Plaid Cymru, SNP, SDLP &c also want House Of Lords reform, the numbers are there. There's no need for the Liberal Democrats to do any 80% compromise with the Conservatives.

Mon, 2011-04-04 19:50 — fredtheshred (not verified)

No doubt Clegg will be duly blessed for this. That other moral charlatan Tony Blair received the Papal dispensation. I don't think somehow that Clegg will reach such ecclesiastical heights.