Consensus call for Lords reform

A committee will review how the Lords operates

Peers from all political parties have called for a consensus to be reached on reform of the House of Lords.

There was no bill on Lords reform in Tuesday's Queen's Speech, but ministers made clear their commitment to the removal of the 92 hereditary peers.

The government said a committee of MPs and peers would be set up to review the way the Lords operates.

But Tory Lord Salisbury, Lib Dem Lord McNally and new Labour peer Clive Soley, said a consensus was needed.

'More representative' chamber

In her speech, the Queen told Parliament: "My government will bring forward proposals to continue the reform of the House of Lords."

It was later confirmed that the aim of reform would be to make the second chamber "effective, legitimate and more representative, without challenging the primacy of the House of Lords".

The government will find it is trying to clip the wings of a bird with a very sharp beak unless they come up with some really genuine constructive proposals Lord McNally Liberal Democrats

The joint committee of peers and MPs would review the conventions of the Lords, such as whether peers refrain from opposing manifesto commitments of the government.

And MPs would be allowed a free vote on the House of Lords' composition, which could include directly electing peers, before legislation on its reform was tabled.

Lord Salisbury, who used to lead the Tories in the Lords, said it was "rather important" consensus was reached on the structure of the second chamber.

He said he favoured an upper house which had an elected element.

Deep divisions

"We have been arguing, quite rightly, that we needed to reform their lordships' house for over 100 years now - we need to bring this to a conclusion," he told BBC Radio 4's Today programme.

"The only difficulty of course is that Mr Blair doesn't want to do so ... "

Mr Soley, former chairman of the Parliamentary Labour Party, who is a new recruit to the Lords, said he would like to see a part elected, part appointed House.

He said he did not want the elected peers to be in the majority but argued the appointees should be made up of regional and political peers, plus independents.

The movement was towards a consensus, said Mr Soley, but he warned there had been deep divisions within his own party about the way forward.

Stalled reforms

Lord McNally, leader of the Lib Dems in the Lords, said the government "clearly haven't got the first idea" what it wants to do with the Lords.

"It's extraordinary that, going into its ninth year, the only thing that the government seems to be really concerned about is to clip the wings of the one place which seems to put any check or balance on the power of the already over powerful executive," he told Today.

He warned: "If the government wants to clip the House of Lords' wings, it will find it is trying to clip the wings of a bird with a very sharp beak unless they come up with some really genuine constructive proposals."

All but 92 hereditary peers were removed in 1999 in changes that were meant to be the first stage of Lords reform.

But there was no consensus on seven options for further changes, which ranged from an all-appointed upper house to a fully-elected one.

The government later tried to remove the remaining hereditaries but dropped the plan because of Lords' opposition.