Author Archives: Paul Tyler

Lord (Paul) Tyler writes: Political reform has been lost along the way by the Coalition

By Paul Tyler | Mon 13th May 2013 - 6:45 pm

I first spoke in a Queen’s Speech debate in March 1974. I recall being mystified by that vital penultimate sentence heard again in this year’s speech: “other measures will be laid before you”. It is these innocent, innocuous words which turn out to be quite important. And they give hope that there will be other vital measures excluded at present from the text of the Speech itself.

There are two commitments in the party manifestos and the Coalition Agreement that seem to have been lost along the …

Posted in Op-eds | Tagged coalition agreement, lobbying, lords reform, party funding, political reform and queen's speech | 4 Comments

Paul Tyler writes: What would Keynes do?

By Paul Tyler | Tue 22nd January 2013 - 8:58 am

Amidst all the sound and fury (from the Conservative benches), about the delay in implementing boundary changes, agreed by a substantial majority in the Lords last Monday evening, one important argument seems to have got lost.

When Labour left office in May 2010, we were given to understand that the electoral register was some 92% complete. Parliament decided in the discussions on the Parliamentary Voting Systems and Constituencies Bill that this was a sufficiently robust basis for the redrawing of constituencies along strict arithmetic lines.

Subsequently, research by the Electoral Commission established that it was nothing like as complete. Nationally, the figure …

Posted in Op-eds | Tagged electoral commission and parliamentary boundary review | 9 Comments

Paul Tyler writes: Progress postponed

By Paul Tyler | Wed 10th October 2012 - 12:56 pm

There was no talk this year of banning champagne at the Conservative Party Conference. Perhaps there was no danger of exuberance among delegates. As recalcitrant Tories sought one-in-the-eye against Nick Clegg by erasing Lords Reform from the Coalition Agreement, their party’s treasured redrawing of the UK electoral map was duly jettisoned too. Without a stronger second chamber to challenge the executive, it would have been wrong to reduce the size of the House of Commons, thereby increasing the proportionate dominance of the government’s ‘payroll’ within it.

Clearly, the failure of the most comprehensive attempt to reform the composition of the Lords …

Posted in Op-eds | Tagged conservative party, house of lords, lords reform and paul tyler | 3 Comments

Paul Tyler writes… Conservative crisis, Labour leaderless

By Paul Tyler | Tue 7th August 2012 - 5:00 pm

It’s a good job I’m not a betting man, having said here in July “my bets are strongly against the Government giving up at this point”. But now we know: David Cameron’s authority within the Conservative Party is so weak that he cannot even persuade his MPs to support an agreed manifesto commitment, and a Bill unanimously supported by his Cabinet. Cameron and Osborne voted for the 80% elected component as long ago as 2003, yet this summer their right-wing backbenchers simply would not accept elections at all.

Unsurprisingly, concern for future of their own constituencies – as boundary changes …

Posted in Op-eds | Tagged coalition, lords reform and Parliament | 42 Comments

Paul Tyler writes: A victory for democracy?

By Paul Tyler | Wed 25th July 2012 - 6:58 pm

Doubtless some peers now believe that they can go off for the long summer recess, secure in the knowledge that the status quo in the House of Lords is preserved. The thought of a shake-up is so uncomfortable for some inhabitants that they have resorted to calling the Coalition’s House of Lords Reform Bill ‘rushed’, despite its genesis in over a decade of cross-party discussion, and a hundred years of gestation. Yet after subjecting the legislation to a painstaking Joint Committee, which met thirty times to take evidence from almost everyone who has ever thought about the subject, my bets …

Posted in Op-eds | Tagged coalition agreement, house of lords and lords reform | 3 Comments

Lord Tyler writes… Only the Government’s Bill can take the hereditary principle out of Parliament

By Paul Tyler | Wed 15th February 2012 - 2:23 pm

There has for some years been a conceit in the House of Lords that the place could gain stature and authority simply by doing a bit of tidying up at the edges, and by ending the hereditary principle. There has been a further conceit that this work can be done without controversy or delay.

Our own David Steel has been a doughty proponent of this approach, as a logical precursor to more comprehensive reform. Last Friday, he gave Peers their best opportunity ever to prove that it could work.

Yet the Lords showed itself resistant even to the modest changes on offer. …

Posted in News | Tagged david steel and lords reform | 6 Comments

Paul Tyler writes… Second chamber must have more members than the government proposes

By Paul Tyler | Mon 9th January 2012 - 9:53 am

Happy New Year. As all the political ‘look back at 2011’ newspaper supplements make their way to the recycling bin, I am risking a bold prediction that their ‘look back at 2012’ successors will report the first serious attempt by any Government to introduce elections to the House of Lords.

When David Cameron and Nick Clegg published their draft Bill back in May last year, the reaction was predictable. Snorts of derision from the refuseniks, cavilling about detail, accusations of plain stupidity. You know when people are losing an argument if they claim that those who disagree simply …

Posted in Op-eds | Tagged Joint Committee of the Draft House of Lords Reform Bill | 9 Comments

Paul Tyler writes… A manual for Coalition?

By Paul Tyler | Wed 7th September 2011 - 2:25 pm

Dr Andrew Blick, a Senior Research Fellow at Democratic Audit, and Lord (Peter) Hennessy have co-authored a new report called The Hidden Wiring Emerges. (It provides the best and most comprehensive analysis yet of the Coalition’s draft Cabinet Manual, published in December 2010.

The whole document – and the whole report on it – should attract anyone concerned with the health of our democracy. However, one point of dispute may interest Liberal Democrats in particular.

The authors highlight an idea described in the Manual that, following the resignation of a Prime Minister after a General Election, the person ‘seemingly most likely …

Posted in Op-eds | Tagged andrew blick, constitutional reform and lord peter hennessy | 3 Comments

Lord Tyler writes: Don’t listen to the doomsayers

By Paul Tyler | Fri 1st July 2011 - 10:53 am

Since the publication of the Government’s White Paper and Draft Bill on House of Lords reform, the old guard have lined up to cavil about its detail, to deride its democratic principles and to defend – in the last ditch – the status quo.

This has augmented the popular media’s predisposition towards arch cynicism and trenchant pessimism. Yet there is firm evidence to contradict their lazy assumptions. Just because Labour engaged in over a decade of dither and delay does not mean that a determined government, with the resolve of the House of Commons behind it, cannot succeed.

The …

Posted in Op-eds and Parliament | Tagged andrew adonis, chris bryant, constitutional reform, dan rogerson, david cameron, david miliband, duncan hames, house of lords, joyce quin, larry whitty, laura sandys, lord mcnally, lords reform, mark harper, mark williams, nick clegg, nick true and therese coffey | 8 Comments

Lord Tyler writes: the mischief continues

By Paul Tyler | Thu 10th February 2011 - 3:20 pm

The BBC’s excellent Westminster correspondent, Mark D’Arcy has got the measure of what’s going on in the House of Lords at the moment, and his update is as good as any.

I only question the credit he gives to Lord Falconer, who is far too obviously partisan to attract serious support from the Crossbenchers. It is former Labour Minister – and shrewd operator – Lord (Jeff) Rooker who has twice achieved victory over the Government by bringing a healthy chunk of them along with him. He does it by saying his amendments are meant to be helpful, …

Posted in News | Tagged av referendum and lord falconer | 25 Comments

Paul Tyler writes… Radicals and reactionaries on the red benches

By Paul Tyler | Wed 2nd February 2011 - 1:00 pm

Julian Glover, writing on the Guardian website, has called the situation in the House of Lords well today. “This is a ceasefire not an armistice,” he says.

As of midday today (Wednesday), Lord “Charlie” Falconer appears to have retreated from the undertakings he was giving earlier in the week to expedite the Parliamentary Voting Systems and Constituencies (PVSC) Bill. Labour Peers are apparently determined both delay and elongate the Report Stage, so making it impossible for the AV referendum to take place on May 5th. As Julian Glover says, “the behaviour of a gang of timeserving Labour …

Posted in Op-eds | Tagged av referendum, chris rennard, electoral reform, julian glover and Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill | 8 Comments

Paul Tyler writes… Party funding: dilemmas and delays

By Paul Tyler | Wed 10th November 2010 - 10:58 am

Since so many of us have fought elections against extremely well-funded opposition candidates, Liberal Democrats are naturally and rightly exercised by the matter of campaign finance. Though Labour made some modest progress with its Political Parties, Elections and Referendums (PPERA) Act, back in 2000, the Act’s focus was transparency, rather than regulation.

When I chaired the party’s policy group on Better Governance in 2007, we set out an objective that no donor should be able to buy influence in the political process, and no party should be able to buy elections. This was the approach we took in the cross-party talks …

Posted in Op-eds and Parliament | Tagged lord ashcroft, lord mcnally, party funding and political parties elections and referendums act 2000 | 4 Comments

Opinion: Change needed

By Paul Tyler | Wed 9th January 2008 - 5:18 pm

As Lynne Featherstone’s article on this site suggested, the Wednesday half hour of Prime Minister’s Questions is simply a mock medieval jousting tournament, appropriate for a mock medieval palace. As an MP, I only had to stand in for the Leader once, but I was a horrified observer for too many years.

For serious scrutiny, and real accountability, the half yearly interrogation of the PM by the Liaison Committee is potentially more valuable, and can still make good television. There the PM has to take questions – without the assistance of Ministerial colleagues or civil servants – for two whole hours, and he doesn’t get the last word. If squirming is your sport, the Liaison Committee is a good place to be a spectator.

Posted in Op-eds | Tagged paul tyler | 2 Comments

Social mobility: is the Coalition doing enough to encourage it?

Stephen Tall asks: "Did Nate Silver write in vain?"

Nick Clegg: "Of course the EU has to change"

"Mad, swivel-eyed loons": a top Tory on the Tories

Author Archives: Paul Tyler

Lord (Paul) Tyler writes: Political reform has been lost along the way by the Coalition

Paul Tyler writes: What would Keynes do?

Paul Tyler writes: Progress postponed

Paul Tyler writes… Conservative crisis, Labour leaderless

Paul Tyler writes: A victory for democracy?

Lord Tyler writes… Only the Government’s Bill can take the hereditary principle out of Parliament

Paul Tyler writes… Second chamber must have more members than the government proposes

Paul Tyler writes… A manual for Coalition?

Lord Tyler writes: Don’t listen to the doomsayers

Lord Tyler writes: the mischief continues

Paul Tyler writes… Radicals and reactionaries on the red benches

Paul Tyler writes… Party funding: dilemmas and delays

Opinion: Change needed

Most Read

Op-eds

Recent Comments

Social mobility: is the Coalition doing enough to encourage it?

Stephen Tall asks: "Did Nate Silver write in vain?"

Nick Clegg: "Of course the EU has to change"

"Mad, swivel-eyed loons": a top Tory on the Tories

Author Archives: Paul Tyler

Subscribe

Most Read

Search

Op-eds

Recent Comments