Lords Reform: if some is better than none...

Friday sees the Committee Stage in the Lords of the House of Lords Reform Bill. No, not that one, the Private Members Bill introduced by David Steel or, as one should refer to him, Baron Steel of Aikwood.

Whilst he has indicated his opposition to the outline proposals currently being debated by the joint pre-legislation scrutiny committee, he is calling for some desperately need reforms. For example, the Bill calls for

• the abolition of by-elections for hereditary Peers
• the removal from the House of any Peer found guilty of a serious criminal offence and sentenced to more than a year in prison
• the transfer of the power of nomination to a Statutory Appointments Commission consisting of nine members nominated by the Speaker of the House of Commons and the Lord Speaker of the House of Lords.
• a limit on the number of Peers - less than the number of Members of the House of Commons
• the right to take permanent leave of absence, i.e. an opportunity to retire.

Yes, there is no reference to election, and the overall effect would only emerge slowly, but it would represent an advance whilst the Government's proposals wend their way through the legislative minefield that will undoubtedly be laid. And, if the Government loses its nerve, there would at least be some reform, rather than none.

The Committee Stage will also provide an indication as to how the House of Lords is likely to approach the question of reform. My sources indicate that hereditary Peers are likely to oppose even these modest proposals, which does not augur well for the prospects of the Government Bill, when it finally arrives...