Lords reform proposals published

Tom Griffin, 14 July 2008

Subjects:

Tom Griffin (London, The Green Ribbon): Jack Straw has today published the Government's white paper on reform of the House of Lords.

The proposals call for a chamber which is 80-100 per cent elected, with members serving a single non-renewable 12-15 year term and a third of the chamber retiring at each election

One key point that emerged from Anthony Barnett's discussion with David Marquand below is that the choice of electoral system is likely to be crucial, not just to the future of the second chamber, but to the case for reform of the Commons.The White Paper leaves that issue very much open:

The Government proposes that members of the second chamber should be elected directly. There was not consensus about the system that should be used for such elections. The Conservative Party favours a First Past The Post system. The Liberal Democrats favour the use of an open list or Single Transferable Vote system. The Government believes that further consideration should be given to the options of using either a First Past The Post, Alternative Vote, Single Transferable Vote (STV), open or semi-open list system. The Government would welcome views on what system should be used for elections to a wholly or mainly elected second chamber.

This article is published by Tom Griffin, and openDemocracy.net under a Creative Commons licence. You may republish it without needing further permission, with attribution for non-commercial purposes following these guidelines. These rules apply to one-off or infrequent use. For all re-print, syndication and educational use please see read our republishing guidelines or contact us. Some articles on this site are published under different terms. No images on the site or in articles may be re-used without permission unless specifically licensed under Creative Commons.

Comments

Anonymous

14 July 2008 - 10:29pm

I love the way the papers (at least the online editions that I've seen) are reporting it as simply a factual "and the electoral system will be either First Past the Post or some proportional system". Its as though they see the two are broadly similar and its just a matter of preference; akin to someone asking you "would you like custard or cream with your pudding, sir?" Many in the media (OpenDemocracy excepted) seem to have failed to understand - or at least report on - what a fundamental difference the choice of system makes. While some are picking up on the Nick Herbert bit of PR-bashing, or the difference between Labour and Tory policies on systems, very few are actually examining what it might mean in practice .... or what it says about the respective parties.