Archer case may change peer rules

Current rules mean Lord Archer will keep his peerage

Downing Street has hinted that parliamentary rules could be changed in the wake of Lord Archer's jail sentence.

It has suggested that peers convicted of criminal offences could be stripped of their title.

It's high time the Commons worked on a bill to deal with peers who have committed very serious crimes

Harold Brooks-Baker
Burke's Peerage

An Old Bailey jury convicted the best-selling novelist of two counts of perjury and two counts of perverting the course of justice on Thursday.

Some MPs say they would lose their seats if they were convicted of a crime and argue it is farcical their counterparts should be able to return from prison into the House of Lords.

Lords reforms

Downing Street had said on Thursday there were no plans to take away Lord Archer's peerage after his conviction.

But on Friday, the prime minister's spokesman followed Commons leader Robin Cook in hinting the case could prompt changes.

"I think it is one of those subjects which, as we go forward on House of Lords reform, may be a subject that people wish to address," he said.

The last time a peer lost his title was in 1917 when the Titles Deprivation Act was applied to four people on grounds of treason.

Downing Street's latest remarks came after veteran Conservative MP Sir Teddy Taylor joined the clamour for change.

"If the House of Lords is going to retain its respectability, I think people found guilty of crimes should be quietly excluded from it."

Farcical inequality

Labour MP Lindsay Hoyle also added to the debate, saying: "It certainly needs reviewing very quickly because the present situation makes a farce of everything."

Harold Brooks-Baker, publisher of Burke's Peerage, said: "It's high time the Commons worked on a bill to deal with peers who have committed very serious crimes - otherwise it makes a nonsense of the peerage."

Ted Francis was found not guilty

In another twist to the case, Lady Archer could now face a police inquiry over the evidence she gave to her husband's trial.

Questions about her testimony were raised by the trial judge, Mr Justice Potts, and detectives have said they will now "reflect" on whether she should be interviewed.

Lord Archer's co-defendant Ted Francis, who triggered the novelist's downfall, was found not guilty of perverting the course of justice.

Mr Francis has said he is relieved with the verdict and now wants to get on with his life.

'Liar, cheat and chancer'

The Old Bailey jury found that Lord Archer had lied and cheated in his 1987 libel case against the Daily Star, which had printed a story claiming he had slept with a prostitute.

The newspaper, which had to pay £500,000 in damages at the time, has issued proceedings to get its money back plus interest - a total of £2.2m.

Its editor Peter Hill said no one should have any sympathy for Lord Archer, whom he called a "proven liar, a cheat and a chancer".

Daily Star editor Peter Hill wants damages from Lord Archer

"He is a man so arrogant that he thought he was above the law. Now finally he has got what he deserved."

The News of the World newspaper will also be seeking about £300,000 from Lord Archer for an out-of-court settlement and costs paid over the prostitute claims.

Sentencing Lord Archer Mr Justice Potts said: "These charges represent as serious an offence of perjury as I have had experience of and have been able to find in the books."

Lord Archer, who was ordered to pay £175,000 costs within 12 months, was told by the judge he would have to serve at least half of his sentence.

He was cleared by the jury of one count of perverting the course of justice.

Lord Archer's solicitor, Tony Morton-Hooper, has said his client planned to appeal.