On the same day that 70 Tory MPs pledged to rebel against Lords reform, YouGov today released data showing the public are not supportive of the changes either.
.
On the same day that 70 Tory MPs pledged to rebel against Lords reform, YouGov today released data showing the public are not supportive of the changes either.
Fifty per cent of people surveyed believe that Lords reform is not a priority, with 18% feeling it works well and should be left alone.
Even though the reforms have been described as “Nick Clegg’s baby”, his Party’s supporters have not sided with him this time, as only 28% of Liberal Democrat voters say they support the changes.
Only 42% said they wanted a mostly-elected chamber, with the remainder of people wanting either an appointed chamber (14%) or a mixture of appointed and elected (29%).
YouGov president Peter Kellner said:
Times are tough. Britain has huge economic problems. Some of the key actors in our public life, including politicians, bankers and journalists, are regarded as crooks and cheats.
In these circumstances, MPs should be wary of deciding that their priority is a constitutional form that leaves much of the public cold, and which does nothing to remove the failings that offend so many voters.
The debate about the fundamental purpose of the Lords is the one that should be happening but isn’t. A clear consensus about function should precede any decision about form.
Two weeks ago I argued that Lords reform is probably doomed this time round. Given the lack of public enthusiasm and the failure of the government to tell us what it believes the basic function of a reformed Lords to be, few people will mourn the Bill’s likely death.
These results come as another blow for government hopes for a majority vote, as 70 Tory rebels said they would not vote for the reforms in a letter sent to The Times.
• A coalition (still) at war over Lords reform 27 Jun 2012
• Tory tantrums: Backbenchers on the warpath over Hunt and Lords reform 18 Jun 2012
• Labour must get back to its principles on Lords reform 23 Apr 2012
The Guardian reports:
The coalition government is facing the prospect of its first major Commons defeat after a 70-strong group of Tory rebels signed a letter opposing House of Lords reform before a crucial vote on Tuesday.
The letter was released as Nick Clegg, the Liberal Democrat deputy prime minister, prepared to appeal for unity over proposals for an 80%-elected upper chamber as he opened a two-day debate on the bill on Monday afternoon.
Amid growing tension in the coalition and the threat of a mass Tory rebellion, Clegg has sought to cast the vote on Tuesday night as a test of David Cameron’s leadership.
Left Foot Forward reported previously how Conservative MPs were planning on voting against Lords reform as an act of revenge for the Lib Dem’s abstention over the parliamentary vote on Jeremy Hunt’s referral to the government advisor on the ministerial code.
The Telegraph reported Eleanor Laing MP as saying:
“Why are we supposed to bend over backwards to support Nick Clegg’s over something that only matters to Lib Dems when his party cannot support a fellow minister who has done nothing wrong?”
It is a shame that a decision on historic constitutional change has lost its significance behind a cloud of political point scoring.
Although the government surely has bigger things to worry about, considering a defeat in the Commons on Lords reform would signal the Coalition’s first defeat and a very large nail in their coffin.
26 Responses to “Lords reform looks doomed as poll shows most people do not favour mostly elected House”
Selohesra
Limiting the debate time like is being proposed and denying referendum on such major constitutional change is hardly democratic
Selohesra
But with party list and PR you will inevitably get a load of conformist placeman who owe their position to their tradition of not rocking the boat – the current HoL has its fair share of those but it also has a few independent minded individuals who have shown in the past they are prepared to stand up and question whichever party is in power
Richard
A Jury-based legislature would not be representative. Juries are randomly selected, with people with obvious biases (such as whether they know witnesses or accused, etc.) then filtered out. They are then led through the judicial process by the judge and respective legal teams and are sometimes even instructed how to vote.
Having a a legislature consisted of randomly politically-conscripted citizens, who would probably have as little interest there as the 20% of current Lords who only vote upto 2 times a year, would be a disaster. Of course, you could apply various filters to sex, race, age and political persuasion… which inevitably leads back to a party based system except where the members have been chosen at random not elected.
Richard
Research by Unlock Democracy has shown that the Lords are less likely to defy their party line than MPs are.
Appointed Lords can be as effectively whipped as MPs as they can have their privileges reduced or even expelled from their party. True, they can continue sitting as an independent but at least under these proposals they’re not in there for life, as is the case at present.
Richard
1/4 of the current House of Lords are former MPs, with 1 in 2 new appointees since 2010 being an MP and the rest being former advisers, party donors, etc. I don’t see how anyone *elected* to the Lords would be a “failed/washed-up politician” – that doesn’t make sense. Are MPs the pinnacle of politician-hood and all other people who are councillors, assembly members, MEPs, etc. second rate? What about those councillors, MEPs, etc. who go on to be MPs – are they suddenly more capable than before?
It’s the current system that has “failed/washed-up politicians” in the Lords.