Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

Lords reform splits Labour

Rachel Sylvester Political Editor
Saturday 08 May 1999 23:02 BST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

A CABINET row has erupted over Labour's plans for reform of the House of Lords. Baroness Jay, the Leader of the Lords, and John Prescott, the Deputy Prime Minister, are angry that Tony Blair has over-ruled them about the eventual make-up of the reformed Upper Chamber.

They believe his determination to back an entirely appointed House of Lords has left the Labour party open to accusations that it is determined to fill Parliament with "Tony's cronies".

Baroness Jay and Mr Prescott believe there should be an element of either directly or indirectly elected members included as part of the second stage of Lords reform.

The Lords leader believes this would allow the Government to contrast the democratic make-up of the reformed House with the inclusion of unelected peers in the current system. The Deputy Prime Minister also wants the regions to be able to send representatives to Westminster in order to ensure that all parts of the country are covered by the Lords.

However, according to Labour party sources, the Prime Minister insisted that the Upper Chamber should be entirely appointed because he fears that an elected element would create too much of a challenge to the Commons. One insider said he had personally made clear to Baroness Jay that the party line would be to support a House of nominees.

The row centres on Labour's evidence to the Royal Commission on Lords reform, which was submitted to Lord Wakeham last week. Although the document was left deliberately vague, the Labour party told journalists that Mr Blair did not support an elected second chamber. Reports last weekend said that the evidence would urge the Royal Commission to propose a wholly nominated House.

Baroness Jay and Mr Prescott were furious when they saw these reports, believing that they misrepresented a submission which had been carefully written to avoid coming down in favour of one particular system. They were anxious to avoid being seen to dictate to the Royal Commission what its conclusions should be. Keith Ewing, the author of the report, was also concerned that his ambiguous words had been turned into a tough commitment to a nominated House.

Baroness Jay was forced to issue a "clarifying" statement to Labour peers last week contradicting the suggestion that the party was backing an entirely appointed chamber.

The reports left the Labour party open to accusations of "cronyism" at a time when the Lords leader is struggling to force the Government's legislation removing the voting rights of hereditary peers through the Upper Chamber. They threatened to jeopardise the Lords reform bill.

Peers will vote on Tuesday whether or not to accept the compromise deal drawn up between Mr Blair and Lord Cranborne which would allow 92 hereditary peers to remain in the Lords until the second stage of reform is completed.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

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