MPs accuse Blair of breaking promise on elected peers
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Tony Blair was accused of breaking manifesto pledges to form a "more democratic" House of Lords yesterday when he made plain his support for a fully appointed second chamber.
Labour backbenchers expressed fury after Mr Blair told MPs a partly elected chamber would not work and said an all-elected house would create legislative "gridlock".
MPs will vote on seven options for reform next Tuesday. Most Labour backbenchers are thought to favour a mainly elected second chamber.
But Mr Blair said he did not believe a partly elected house would work. He told MPs: "The issue then is do we want an elected house or do we want an appointed house?
"I personally think a hybrid between the two is wrong and will not work. And I also think that the key question on election is do we want a revising chamber or a rival chamber?"
Reformers said he had turned his back on Labour's 1997 and 2001 manifesto commitments to establish a more democratic upper house. In a speech to the Welsh Assembly just over a year ago, he promised that "there will be an elected element to ensure proper regional representation".
Mr Blair's spokesman said he had "listened to the arguments''.
Downing Street sources said Mr Blair believed a partly elected Lords would challenge the power of the Commons and stop governments implementing their manifestos.
One MP said Mr Blair's rejection of a partly elected Lords was "arrogant nonsense".
Reformers accused Mr Blair of being too close to Lord Irvine of Lairg, the Lord Chancellor, who has emerged as a key opponent of an elected Lords. Graham Allen, Labour MP for Nottingham North, and a vociferous campaigner for reform, said: "On top of fox hunting, top-up fees, foundation hospitals, Mr Blair has now loaded the Lords on the camel's back."
Martin Salter, Labour MP for Reading West, said an all- appointed Lords "could not exactly be considered 'more democratic and representative' and would make us look a laughing stock in the eyes of the public". Writing in today's issue of the left-wing journal Tribune, he said: "We promised to deliver 'a more representative and democratic' second chamber, building on our achievement of evicting most of the hereditary peers in 1999. There is absolutely no mandate for either abolition or the continuation of the discredited system of appointed patronage.''
Robin Cook, Leader of the Commons, who championed efforts to find a compromise in favour of reform, was said to be disappointed by Mr Blair's decision. Sources said Tuesday's vote was too close to call.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments