Straw pledges Lords reform vote

Reform of the Lords is seen as unfinished business

There should be a vote on the future make-up of the House of Lords around the "turn of the year", new Commons leader Jack Straw has told MPs.

Mr Straw said the government was about to begin talks with opposition parties about the next stage of Lords reform.

Recent newspaper reports have suggested the Cabinet favours a 60%-elected House of Lords in the reforms.

Most hereditary peers were removed from the Lords in 1999 but 92 were allowed to remain ahead of further changes.

But when seven options for reform - ranging from a fully elected to a fully appointed chamber - were put to MPs and peers, they were all rejected.

'No veto'

Mr Straw was giving evidence to the new committee examining the powers and conventions, but not the composition, of the Lords.

Under a long-standing convention, peers do not vote down government manifesto promises but ministers have complained that the Lords have been more troublesome in recent years.

Mr Straw said there should be an agreement on the Lords' conventions before moving onto arguments about the membership of the Lords.

The Lords must be able to scrutinise legislation effectively "but not to a point where they delay it so much that they are effectively seeking to veto".

Mr Straw, who was moved from foreign secretary to Commons leader in the recent reshuffle, has previously joined Tony Blair is voting for an all-appointed Lords.

But he said that had been in a free vote and he now had new responsibilities to find a solution to the issue.

'Soothsaying'

Mr Straw refused to put a figure on the future mix between appointed and elected peers.

He told BBC Radio 4's World At One: "I cannot say for certain but my own sense is that a mixed elected-appointed chamber... is probably where the consensus of agreement is likely to lie.

"But I'm soothsaying here."

It would mean electing peers in a different way to MPs and phasing in the reforms over time, he suggested.

Labour promised in its manifesto to make the Lords more representative.

Mr Straw said: "If it's possible to avoid partisan disagreements, so much the better in order to get a new constitutional framework established."

He hoped there would be votes on composition around the "turn of the year".

'What's our sin?'

The Conservative Lords leader, Lord Strathclyde, said he looked forward to the free votes on the make-up of the Lords.

But he warned ministers that MPs and peers would resist weakening the Lords' powers "so they can sneak in some sort of elected house with minimal powers that they will be able to control".

Lord McNally, Liberal Democrat leader in the Lords, was also critical of plans to change the Lords' powers.

"I'm still not clear what sin we are guilty of which needs to be put right," he said.

"The government has lost no legislation, there is no manifesto commitment which has been deferred by the House of Lords, and I still don't understand why - other than the convenience of the government machine - why there needs to be changes."