There is a real danger political infighting around Lords reform may derail the process entirely, writes Katie Ghose, chief exec of the Electoral Reform Society.
.
Katie Ghose is the chief executive of the Electoral Reform Society
There is a real danger political infighting around Lords reform may derail the process entirely.
At this crucial juncture, before the bill begins its journey through parliament, only Labour can play the vital role of standing up for reform and championing the rights and wishes of British voters.
A YouGov poll (xls) published today found 69% of people support an elected second chamber and in fact between 54-82% of the public have supported an elected upper house since 2000.
Despite this public support and the fact MPs from all three main parties were elected on manifesto commitments to progress Lords reform, an unholy alliance of peers and MPs is emerging in support of the status quo, often for tactical rather than principled reasons.
Labour included a referendum promise in its manifesto and is understandably sticking by this, but while a Labour majority government with Liberal Democrats joining the Yes side could comfortably commit to a public ballot, a coalition government with Conservative rebels running amok is an entirely different prospect.
Labour supporters who genuinely believe in Lords reform should be wary of the referendum question overtaking all others and being abused by those who want reform kicked into the long grass.
• A coalition at war over Lords reform 23 Apr 2012
• Tories threaten to ignore their mandate on Lords reform 20 Apr 2012
• Lords big beasts turn up the heat on reform 27 Jun 2011
In this quagmire Labour has every opportunity to be the voters’ voice and point out the unarguable; that if you hold the power to help decide how Britain is run you should be elected by us, the British public.
Not being allowed to elect our politicians is an absurd anachronism impossible to explain to anyone outside the UK, and especially to new or developing democracies for whom the establishment of elected representatives is fundamental.
The government line will remain firm but unconvincing given the unseemly fighting within and between coalition partners.
David Cameron will support reform in the full knowledge his foot soldiers will vigorously oppose it every step of the way; Nick Clegg will privately reassure activists this is a no break deal and in public continue to hold the line that ‘we have more important things to do’.
Labour can take a clear and principled stance, continuing to explain why the chamber should be elected and how this will enhance its democratic role and the collective strength of both houses of our Parliament.
In opposition Labour can expose myths about expertise or independence by pointing out being elected does not conflict with either of these qualities.
It can point to the positives; the opportunity for a reformed chamber to look and feel far more like modern Britain, and it can do what the committee was supposed to have been doing and the current Lords seems unable to do; it can provide objective scrutiny and ensure the bill that emerges is the right bill for British democracy.
This work should come naturally to the party as it is Labour who over decades has consistently promoted Lords reform, engaged constructively with the numerous cross-party processes and achieved critical steps towards the abolition of hereditary peers. It is time now for the Labour Party to pull together to do what it knows needs to be done.
To reach hundreds of thousands of new readers and to make the biggest impact we can in the next general election, we need to grow our donor base substantially.
That's why in 2024, we are seeking to generate 150 additional regular donors to support Left Foot Forward's work.
We still need another 124 people to donate to hit the target. You can help. Donate today.
23 Responses to “Labour must get back to its principles on Lords reform”
Mr. Sensible
Katie, I’m afraid supporters of an elected upper house are just plain misguided. If we were to do that, then the fear is that we would end up with a carbon copy of the House of Commons, and legislative scrutiny would be much the poorer to have 2 of those.
Paul Barker
If this is the level of political understanding shown by the ERS no wonder they made such a mess of the Yes to AV campaign. Labour have never had much interest in either reform or democracy, except if they think it will give them more power. The idea labour can actually lead this struggle is just silly, the best supporters of reform can hope for is that most labour MPs vote in favour of the coalition proposols or at least abstain. The call for a referendum is a tactic to block reform with no legitimacy simply because it was in labours manifesto, labour lost.
Political Planet
Labour must get back to its principles on Lords reform: There is a real danger political infighting around Lords… http://t.co/5EDuqj0d
Dave
Agreed.
It initially seems perverse, but an unelected second chamber is probably a lot better for democracy – at least if Lords are appointed by elected officials, rather than inherited (which is the case nowadays).
I certainly don’t want two chambers full of members who are more concerned with getting re-elected than with voting according to their beliefs or consciences.
The primary chamber should of course be fully elected, delivering the will of the people – but it’s useful to have a second chamber full of experienced politicians who can examine and changes bills without worrying about being unpopular or getting voted out.
H. O.
RT @leftfootfwd: Labour must get back to its principles on Lords reform http://t.co/3FqirYXx