Fresh Lords reforms are promised

The House of Lords could face further modernisation

The final 92 hereditary peers would be ousted from the House of Lords if Labour is re-elected, according to the party's election manifesto.

Parliament would also be given a free vote on who sits in the Lords, leaving open the possibility of elected peers.

And there would be a review of how the Lords works, something the Tories fear would make it less powerful.

Most hereditary peers were removed in 1999 but the Lib Dems doubt Tony Blair will produce a mostly-elected Lords.

The 1999 changes were meant to be the first stage of Lords reform but there was no consensus on seven options, 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.

Better scrutiny?

On Wednesday, Labour's Patricia Hewitt pledged: "We'll complete the reform of the House of Lords, getting rid of the hereditary peers and allowing a free vote on composition.

"And we'll modernise the Lords procedures to improve scrutiny."

The manifesto says a committee of MPs and peers would search for a deal on codifying the historic conventions of the Lords.

What on earth is the point of electing people to a body that is even less powerful than the current second chamber Lord Strathclyde Tory Lords leader

And a time limit would be imposed so peers spent no longer than 60 sitting days debating legislation.

The Lords can currently delay bills by up to a year under the Parliament Act, which was used to force through the hunting ban.

Labour officials say there may be changes to clarify how the Parliament Act works but cannot imagine trying to reduce substantially the Lords' powers.

Less powerful

They say the new time limit would have affected none of the battles fought over legislation in the Lords since 1997 - on issues such as hunting, anti-terror measures and jury trials.

Instead, they say the limit is designed to ensure the Lords does not become more politicised, with opposition parties able derail the government's programme.

But Conservative Lords Leader Lord Strathclyde said: "What on earth is the point of electing people to a body that is even less powerful than the current second chamber that we have?"

The Tories would make the Lords more independent of government "and therefore, more able to do its job, which is to hold the government to account", he said.

'No action'

Lord Strathclyde said the Tories wanted a "substantially-elected" second chamber.

Tony Blair has in the past voted for an all-appointed Lords but is now seen as willing to countenance at least some elected element.

Liberal Democrat spokesman Mark Oaten said: "I think it's time we moved towards at least having 70% elected in the House of Lords.

"But we've heard these promises before from New Labour so I am very doubtful we'll see any action."

A cross-party group, including Labour's Robin Cook and Tony Wright, Tory Ken Clarke and Lib Dem Paul Tyler, have also pushed for a 70% elected chamber.

'Be clear'

It is likely Labour would put forward a series of options in a free vote for MPs and peers.

But it acknowledges that last time this was done the result did not properly represent MPs' views and a new system may be needed.

Mr Wright told the BBC News website he was concerned that voting on a series of options might founder again.

"I would like there to be a clear government position that we can all support," he said.

Peter Facey, from the Elect the Lords campaign, said all Labour candidates should state how they would vote in a free vote and not be allowed to "duck the issue".