The Campaign for a Democratic Upper House is holding a rally for Lords reform in association with Elect the Lords and Unlock Democracy at the Labour Party Conference in Bournemouth.

Labour Clears the Way!

MONDAY 24th September 9 - 11pm

Deaville Suite, Trouville Hotel, Priory Road, Bournemouth, BH2 5DH

A Rally for supporters of Lords reform with:

Billy Bragg - Singer Songwriter

Tony Benn

Lord Hunt - Minister of State Department of Justice

Angela Eagle MP

Followed by a Labour sing along led by Martin Linton MP and the Battersea Singers Choir.

All welcome, you do not have to be a Labour Party Member or supporter to attend

Food and wine provided

For more details email info@democraticupperhouse.org.uk

For directions to the Trouville Hotel see here and for a map see
View Larger Map

Today marks the 96th anniversary since Parliament first committed itself to democratically reform the House of Lords.

Wouldn’t it be outrageous if it took Parliament more than 100 years to fulfil its commitment to replace the House of Lords with something democratic?

Sadly, that is precisely what may happen. Today marks the 96th anniversary of the Parliament Act 1911 in which Parliament committed itself to replacing the House of Lords with “a Second Chamber constituted on a popular instead of hereditary basis” adding that “such substitution cannot be immediately brought into operation.”

At the time, you might have thought that would mean the House of Lords would be replaced by a democratic second chamber in 10, maybe 20 years. You would have been forgiven for not thinking that by the turn of the millennium, House of Lords reform would remain incomplete!

The good news is that the House of Commons and the Government have now firmly committed themselves to an 80% to 100% elected second chamber. The Commons voted for this in March. The Government confirmed its support for this last month. The House of Lords, perhaps not surprisingly, disagrees. As a result, although it is planning to publish its full plans for reform later this year, the Government is resigned to the fact that reform won’t be completed until after the next General Election.

We now have just four years before the centenary of the 1911 Parliament Act.

For full details of Lords Reform Day being run by the Elect the Lords Campaign please see the Elect the Lords Website.

On 19^th July 2007, Jack Straw, the Secretary of State for Justice and Lord Chancellor, made an important statement on Lords reform in the House of Commons. Jack Straw, who had responsibility for Lords reform before the recent Government reshuffle as Leader of the House of Commons, has retained that responsibility as Justice Minister. Crucially for the Campaign for a Democratic Upper House, the Government, Jack Straw said, are “determined to proceed with this programme of reform with a view to its completion”.

Damien Welfare, Co-ordinator of CDUH, commenting on the statement said:

“The Campaign for a Democratic Upper House welcomes the substance of Mr Straw’s statement. We would have preferred though to see faster progress towards the introduction of legislation for a reformed second chamber”

“Jack Straw has indicated that the Labour party should move towards a clear manifesto commitment to assist the passage of legislation. We welcome this and will campaign to ensure that Labour’s historical commitment to reforming the House of Lords is finally fulfilled. We will campaign to have a clear and unambiguous commitment to securing this reform as early as possible agreed and written into the next Labour Party election manifesto”

The statement from Jack Straw followed further cross-party talks in the light of the votes in the Commons on 7^th March 2007 in favour of a second chamber which was 80% or 100% elected. In his statement on constitutional reform on 3^rd July 2007, the Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, had said that the Government should proceed in line with the wishes of the House of Commons.

Jack Straw said that over the coming months the Government would look at “how best to deliver a substantially or wholly elected second chamber”, based on a House which was 80% or 100% elected. The cross-party talks would continue and look at all aspects of a reform package. Jack Straw also intends to make arrangements so that the Government can take account of the views of Parliamentarians, interest groups and the public; the Campaign for a Democratic Upper House intends to utilise this opportunity fully.

The next steps are intended to be a further White Paper around the turn of the year, possibly accompanied by draft clauses forming elements of the final reform Bill. The Government intends to formulate a “comprehensive reform package” that Labour will put to the electorate as a manifesto commitment at the next General Election, and which it is hoped the other main parties would also include in their manifestoes.

Jack Straw said that he wanted to make clear progress, so that “in the first session of the new Parliament, we can introduce a final measure”. The Campaign for a Democratic Upper House will campaign to make this promise a reality.

Join us and help build the campaign in your CLP, your Trades Union, your Labour Council and in our Labour party!

Commons Statement on Lords reform on the 19th July 2007

The Secretary of State for Justice and Lord Chancellor (Mr. Jack Straw):

With permission, Mr Speaker, I should like to make a statement on the way forward on reform of the House of Lords.

On 7 March 2007, after the free votes in both Houses, I said that I would make arrangements to reconvene the cross-party working group and that, after discussions with that group, I would return to the House to make a statement outlining the Government’s plans. Those free votes marked the fulfilment of the specific terms of one of our manifesto commitments on Lords reform. While the votes were an important milestone, we must not now lose the opportunity to make further and more fundamental reform happen.

In March, this House voted overwhelmingly—indeed, by a majority of 113—for a wholly elected House of Lords. It backed by a margin of 38 a substantially elected House based on an 80 per cent. elected and a 20 per cent. appointed element. It also voted by a majority of 280 to remove the remaining hereditary peers. As part of a comprehensive package of reforms, the Government are committed to removing the anomaly of the remaining hereditary peers, in line with the will of this House.

As this House will be aware, at the same time the other place voted for a wholly appointed House by a majority of 240. My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister said in his statement of 3 July that we should proceed in line with the wishes of this House, which all accept is the primary Chamber. That approach was underlined in the Green Paper on constitutional reform, “The Governance of Britain”, which I published on the same day. The Conservative and Liberal Democrat parties are committed by their 2005 manifestoes to a substantially elected House of Lords. [ Interruption. ] There was no commitment in the Conservative or Liberal Democrat manifestos to a free vote.

Tomorrow in the other place Lord Steel’s private Member’s Bill on Lords reform will have its Second Reading. My noble Friend Lord Hunt of Kings Heath will expand on our response when he speaks in that debate; suffice it now to say that the Bill does not contain the comprehensive reform that is the clear will of this House.

The cross-party talks before the free votes were successful in building up a significant degree of consensus on a range of issues, as reflected in the White Paper on House of Lords reform, which I published in February. I believe that this is the best way of proceeding. I shall continue to lead the cross-party talks, and since the free votes, we have held two further meetings. Given that all three main parties are committed by their manifestos to further reform of the House of Lords, it is right that the group should consist of Front-Bench representatives of the parties, as well as representatives from the Cross Benchers and the Lords Spiritual. But of course we want the widest possible consensus and I intend to make arrangements so that we can take proper account of the views of all parliamentarians, including non-party independent Members, and interest groups and the public.

The White Paper adumbrated the view that the consensus was for a hybrid House involving a 50 per cent. elected and a 50 per cent. appointed element. However, since both Houses rejected that option—notwithstanding my advocacy of it, or perhaps because of my advocacy of it—we will have to proceed with remodelling our work based on an 80 per cent. or 100 per cent. elected House of Lords.

Although there is agreement on some of the areas outlined in the White Paper, there is still some way to go on some other issues. The group will discuss the outstanding elements of the reform package, including powers, electoral systems, financial packages, and the balance and size of the House, including diversity and gender issues. We will also need to discuss the transition towards a reformed House in detail, including the position of the existing life peers and the need for action to avoid gratuitously cutting Conservative party representation in the Lords when and if the remaining hereditary peers are removed.

Let me turn to the powers of a reformed House. The Government have always said that the balance of powers between the two Houses described by the excellent and recent Cunningham report should apply to a reformed House. Those powers are currently underpinned by some statutory provisions, standing orders and conventions. We undertook to look further at whether the current conventions were adequate to ensure the desired relationship with a reformed House, following the free votes.

Over the coming months, we will look at how best to deliver a substantially or wholly elected second Chamber, based on the principle that this House is the primary Chamber and that an elected House of Lords should complement the House of Commons and not be a rival to it. As part of that programme of work it is vital that the relative powers of a reformed House be made clear. We will therefore look at ways to enshrine in a constitutional settlement the current balance of powers and the different roles of the two Houses.

The Government are determined to proceed with this programme of reform with a view to its completion. In dealing with such a central element of the constitution, it is right that there be as much all-party agreement as possible. I accept that there may well not be total agreement, but the constitution does not belong to any one party and it should not be used as a partisan tool.

Sir Patrick Cormack (South Staffordshire) (Con): It does not belong to you, either.

Mr. Straw: The immediate next steps are that I hope to be able to publish a further White Paper around the turn of the year setting out where we have got to in the cross-party talks—possibly accompanied by draft clauses that would form elements of the final reform Bill. Our intention through the work of the cross-party group is to formulate a comprehensive reform package that we would put to the electorate as a manifesto commitment at the next general election and which hopefully the other main parties would include in their manifestoes. [ Interruption. ] There may of course be areas on which each party takes a different view—and we have heard some of them already. However, there is the potential to reach a degree of cross-party consensus that will lead to the completion of Lords reform. The free votes in the Commons in March gave us a clear direction of travel on an issue that has dogged the country for decades. We now have a chance finally to finish the job.

“Let the work of change begin,” Gordon Brown declared today as he returned to Downing Street as the new prime minister of Great Britain.

The Campaign for a Democratic Upper House welcomes the 21^st Labour leader since 1906 and the now Labour Prime Minster to his new role. We hope that the Prime Minister’s calls for a ‘new constitutional settlement’ will be a top priority as he undertakes ‘the work of change’.

“The need for change cannot be met by old politics,” Gordon Brown said as he pledged to build a government that would use all the talents “in the spirit of public service that will make our nation what it can be”.

Gordon Brown said during the leadership hustings that:

‘As far as the House of Lords is concerned 80% elected is how I voted ’Watch Gordon Browns comment on Lords reform on You Tube here (about 7 minutes in).

The Campaign for a Democratic Upper House calls on Gordon Brown to fulfil the historic Labour commitment, the Labour manifesto commitment and current party policy and move with all haste to reform the House of Lords. If Gordon Brown is serious about change then his constitutional settlement must change British politics for good - It cant do this while encumbered by a conservative, antiquated, and totally undemocratic Upper House of Parliament.

Congratulations to Harriet Harman in becoming the new leader of the Labour party, a party in which it is promised there will be enhanced democracy for all party members. We are hoping that the renewal of party democracy will also mean real moves to enhance parliamentary democracy and a drive to fulfil our historic promise of reforming the House of Lords. We look forward to Harriet working closely with Gordon Brown, the new Leader of the Party and Prime Minister (as of tomorrow) to make reform a reality.

The Campaign for a Democratic Upper House welcomes the election of one of our key supporters to such an integral position as Labour looks to rebuild the party from the grassroots. We now call on Harriet Harman to use her new position as deputy leader to push for the democratic reform of the Lords at the earliest possible opportunity, a reform that not only is Labour committed to in its manifesto but a cause that is supported by party members from the Lords, to MP’s to CLP secretaries, chairs, officers and ordinary party members.

Harriet Harman wrote to us to say why she supports the Campaign for a Democratic Upper House:

I voted for a fully elected House of Lords, and have always voted for the most democratic formulation offered to Parliament. A 100% elected House of Lords removes unquestionable right from all positions in Parliament.

The BBC has reported that Tony Blair has said he still personally favours members of the House of Lords being appointed rather than elected. He warned the Commons liaison committee to be “cautious” before trying to “replicate the Commons in the Lords”.

With Cameron’s New Tories on the offensive in trying to take on the ‘progressive’ mantle, Gordon Brown, who has repeatedly indicated his support for democratic reform of the House of Lords, voting for an 80% elected second chamber in the Commons earlier this year must ensure that he chooses progress over patronage.

It seems our Prime Minister for the next week - Tony Blair, feels the need to defend the status quo, and thus his reputation, with the cash-for-peerages controversy still hanging over his head. But it is equally clear that Gordon Brown must make a clean break with the past by calling for a programme of reform sooner rather than later. Labour must reassert its hold over the progressive agenda and clear the way for the necessary and popular reforms of the Lords.

A clear majority of MPs voted for both the 80% and fully elected options this March. The Campaign for a Democratic Upper House calls on Gordon Brown to adopt a new approach by announcing a programme of democratic Lords reform early in his premiership

An article in today’s Times has indicated that ‘Brown will put Lords reform on the back burner’.

For Gordon Brown, a man on the cusp of becoming Prime Minister, a man who has passionately talked about delivering a ‘new constitutional settlement’ for the UK then surely to stall now is conceding ground to the Tories? On one clear issue that the Labour party can put some distance between the Conservative and itself Labour can ill afford to back down. A Tory administration would never push through Lords reform, no Tory leader would risk splitting their vote to get this through – so we know it will only happen under a progressive Labour government.

We need to push this to a vote before the next general election – not fudge the issue with vague manifesto commitments. This is exactly what happened last time, we’ve had a parliamentary committee meeting behind closed doors led by Jack Straw tasked to come up with proposals for the 80% and 100% elected options – why expend the effort only to stall and take no further action when the momentum is building. We don’t need more commitments and words that come to nothing – the mandate is emphatically there, the commons has spoken, the people back reform and so does the Labour party.

With five out of six deputy leadership candidates now backing the Campaign for a Democratic Upper House and a commitment to reforming the House of Lords at the earliest opportunity the momentum is building for progress to be made. For Gordon it’s a win win situation. Yes we all agree there is a lot more to be done, there is a debate to be had over the composition and the method of election, but this is no reason at all to put it off and do nothing, again.

The debate over the Lords has raged on for a long time, in the Labour party it has been a debate lasting a century. Those 100 hundred years have seen us move from supporting the outright abolition, to now recognising the useful scrutinising role of a second chamber and the enhanced democracy this can help deliver; but always there has been a desire to reform it. Brown should move to set these reforms in motion at the earliest opportunity, the debate over the wider constitutional settlement is still to be had – But Lords reform is no longer a debate – there is a massive consensus that reform should be made – reforming the Lords is unfinished business. The argument that the Lords will stall the process is disingenuous – that, is exactly the reason it needs to be started sooner rather then later. It needs to be finished – and proposals need to be brought before the House of Commons before the next General Election.

So Gordon, with five of your potential deputies wanting to move ahead with reform as soon as possible, with public opinion massively supporting reform, and with you in your own words supporting reform: ‘As far as the House of Lords is concerned 80% elected is how I voted’ Lets take the progressive route, the Labour route, the way that Labour been committed to for 100 years to clear, lets do it Gordon, do it for Britain.

Already five of the six deputy leadership candidates have signed up in support of the Campaign for a Democratic Upper House. With ten days to go until the contest finishes at the Labour Party Leadership Conference in Manchester we hope to get all six to pledge their support to this most progressive of causes. Take a look at their voting record; five out of the six voted for a fully elected Upper House, and five out of six for the 80% elected option, all six candidates voted for at least a 50% elected chamber and four of the candidates supporting the campaign so far; Cruddas, Hain, Benn and Harman voted for all the elected options including 100%, whilst Johnson voted for all the elected options up to the 80% elected option.

With all of the deputy leadership candidates voting for at least some elected options and our four supporters voting for it shows that within the Labour movement there is a great desire to fulfil our 100 year old commitment to changing the Lords.

Why not write in and ask all the deputy leadership contenders directly whether they will be supporting a democratic upper house and whether they will work to make this a reality as soon as possible. Its time to choose democracy - the time is now!

• Ask Hilary Benn about his commitment to Lords reform

• Ask Jon Cruddas about his commitment to Lords reform

• Ask Harriet Harman about her commitment to Lords reform

• Ask Peter Hain about his commitment to Lords reform

• Ask Hazel Blears about her commitment to Lords reform

• Ask Alan Johnson about his commitment to Lords reform

There is still one more hustings to take place this Saturday 16th June. Send in your questions to Gordon Brown to pressure him to keep up the momentum on Lords reform and fulfil what the Labour party has been waiting nearly a century for.

Writing in the latest edition of the New Statesman Clive Stafford Smith legal Director of the charity Reprieve makes a compelling and powerful argument for a fully elected House of Lords, taking voting as a fundamental human right that should be championed he exposes the anti-democratic nature of the House of Lords. He writes “Everyone proclaims a commitment to human rights, but in Britain the vision of which rights a human being should enjoy remains opaque… Voting is arguably the most basic of human rights. Article 3 of Protocol 1 to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which Britain signed up to nine years ago, requires that signatory states “undertake to hold free elections . . . which will ensure the free expression of the opinion of the people in the choice of the legislature”. The second chamber of Britain’s legislature is the Lords.” He believes that a legal challenge to the undemocratic nature of the Lords could well succeed, but argues that it should not have to come to that, and rightly so.

Condemning the make-up of the cross-party working group led by Jack Straw as “akin to debating the reform or abolition of the monarchy, but limiting the committee to members of the Windsor family and the aristocracy.” Clive Stafford clearly makes the argument that ordinary citizens should be involved in the process of deciding how the reformed Lords should be constituted and elected. He goes on to question some “…striking omissions. Nowhere is it mentioned that the people have a legal and moral right to elect their legislators. The bravest suggestion is that the House should be partially elected, as there is an “expectation that in a modern parliament the second chamber should have a degree of democratic legitimacy”. Only a “degree”?”

He also recognises that there is “a legitimate debate over how citizens should exercise their right to vote, from first-past-the-post to proportional representation. But there can surely be no sensible debate over whether citizens should vote. That is a human right.”

The Campaign for a Democratic Upper House believes that this is an important debate that must be undertaken. Clive Stafford Smith would argue that with the European Court of Human Rights and the House of Commons on the side of democracy then Jack Straw will be pushed in the direction of proposing a fully elected Upper House.

CDUH believes that at the very least he will have to ensure that, whatever the final proportion of elected Lords is, that the reforms are radical, enhance participation at every stage and have a genuine sense of ownership through involving ordinary citizens in the processes to reform the Lords. This is part of the drive that should be led by the Labour movement to renew our democracy and make it fit for purpose in the 21st Century; only Labour can deliver on Lords reform, lets make sure our leaders choose change, because the time for change is now.

Read the article in full here.