LORDS REFORM KICKED BACK TO CABINET FOR FIRM LEAD

“The constitutional reform agenda – agreed between Labour and Liberal Democrats before the 1997 Election – is in danger of coming to a sticky end,” claimed Paul Tyler, Liberal Democrat Shadow Leader of the Commons, today (Thursday).

Speaking at the University of Essex Seminar ‘Democratic Renewal in the UK’ in London this afternoon Mr Tyler drew attention to the “betrayal of promises on the reform of the House of Lords” as clear evidence of “a loss of nerve by the Prime Minister.”

“As a member of the Joint Select Committee I can confirm that we have NOT kicked the issue into the long grass – we have kicked it back to the Cabinet.”

“I have urged my colleagues – across party – to produce a ‘winding-up report’ to both Houses, to give the Government a clear opportunity, and responsibility, to produce firm proposals to fulfil their promises.  I see no reason for the Committee to do the Government’s work for them.”

“Even at this late stage, Ministers could defy the undertakers and revive the apparent corpse of comprehensive Parliamentary Reform. But time is running out.

“Since they failed to give a lead, based on their commitments and mandate in 1997 and 2001 to create an accountable and democratic Second Chamber, the Cabinet asked our Committee to clarify the options for MPs and Peers to vote on.   We were not asked to provide a solution to the Government’s dilemma.”

“The votes on 4th February did not remove the obligation for the Prime Minister and his Cabinet to fulfil their promises.   Indeed, MPs voted to reject the all appointed House, supported by the Lord Chancellor and explicitly endorsed by the Prime Minister, by a large majority.   It would be constitutionally improper for MPs – on the Joint Committee or anyone else – to connive in an attempt to produce that result.   That must mean that reformers cannot support any Bill to abolish the Hereditary Peers and put the appointments process on a statutory basis.   I do not believe that any such tinkering legislation will make any progress in either House in this Parliament.”.  

“The votes in the Commons gave the Cabinet a lead.   A majority voted for one kind of hybrid option or another, and defeated the attempt to abolish the Second Chamber altogether.   That should concentrate the minds of Ministers. Since the House of Commons must remain preeminent the votes of MPs must count.”

“This failure of nerve is symbolic of a greater betrayal.   The collapse of the Blair radical reform agenda is more widespread.  For example, the comments of the Home Secretary on the outcome of the recent asylum seekers’ case was all too reminiscent of the attacks of Robert Mugabe on the independent judiciary of Zimbabwe.   The retreat on open government, freedom of information and a Civil Service Act to maintain their political independence, are all signs of cowardice and of growing control freakery.”

END