Careful scrutiny urged over reforms

12 April 2012

Ministers were urged to "take a long hard look" at a report on the workings of the House of Lords before launching into further reforms.

Senior Labour peer Lord Cunningham of Felling, the former MP and chair of an all-party joint Committee of the Lords and Commons, called on the Government to take note of the "strong feelings across the political spectrum," on the conventions of Parliament and the way the Commons and Lords work together.

He spoke out at a Westminster news conference to launch the committee's report and amid calls for further Lords' reform with quotas of elected peers.

The report says peers should not be able to propose "wrecking amendments" to government Bills if they change manifesto intentions. And line-by-line scrutiny of manifesto legislation should be carried out in "reasonable time" so that MPs have the opportunity to look at the Bill and any changes the Lords want to make.

The Labour Government ejected over 600 hereditary peers in 1999, leaving behind appointed life peers, Church of England bishops, law lords and a rump of 92 dukes, earls and barons. Since then there have been attempts to discover how Parliament views any further changes in the composition of the second chamber and its powers.

This latest inquiry looked at the relationship between the Lords and the Commons as it affects consideration of legislation. The committee says the traditions could be codified in resolutions of the two Houses. But it also makes clear that should the Lords become elected, all bets are off.

Lord Cunningham said: "I am delighted to be able to present a unanimous report in this crucial and controversial area of working relations between the two Houses of Parliament. it will be an important contribution to whatever happens next on Lords reform."

Asked if any further attempts to alter the make up of the Lords would prove a log jam in the Parliamentary timetable if there was a problem getting agreement, Lord Cunningham replied: "If I was in Government - which I'm not - I would take a long hard look at this report before I launched into any proposals, because given what I think is the quite powerful nature of this unanimous report, we are clearly reflecting strong views across the political spectrum.

"On the other hand people will argue that, OK, if the proposals come forward for a partly elected Second Chamber it's right and proper that the working relationship should be re-examined. How and in what way that would happen would be a matter for Government and Parliament."

But Lord Cunningham said that if it was decided to have elected peers they would quite rightly expect the same level of service and facilities as MPs.

Create a FREE account to continue reading

eros

Registration is a free and easy way to support our journalism.

Join our community where you can: comment on stories; sign up to newsletters; enter competitions and access content on our app.

Your email address

Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number

You must be at least 18 years old to create an account

* Required fields

Already have an account? SIGN IN

By clicking Create Account you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use , Cookie policy and Privacy policy .

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged in