Good news for minor parties, unelected politicians and those who dislike election expense controls

Slipped in near the end of Nick Clegg’s keynote speech to Liberal Democrat conference was the news that the first democratic elections to the House of Lords are pencilled in for 2015.

Party sources have confirmed that the reference to Liberal Democrat candidates at the next general election fighting alongside candidates for a reformed Upper House means the draft Lords reform legislation due to be published early in 2011 is being planned on the basis of elections in 2015.

House of Lords. Photo: Parliamentary copyright images are reproduced with the permission of ParliamentMinor party boost

There are three likely outcomes from having elections to both Houses of Parliament coincide. First, experience from other contests suggests this will boost fringe parties with people seeing their vote for the Commons as a way to pick the Prime Minister and their vote for the Lords as a way to signal concern in a particular interest or cause. Add this to the promise of proportional representation for the Upper House and smaller parties will be looking forward to very favourable conditions.

The unelected survive for longer

Second, holding off on the first set of elections for the full term of Parliament gives all the unelected peers an extra five years in power and beyond the reach of public accountability. Moreover, with serious consideration being given to introduce elections for the Upper House in tranches, some of the unelected could stay in power for many years even beyond that.

Expense controls under strain

Third, the combination of Commons and Lords elections on the same day will put immense strain on the already creaking rules intended to control constituency campaign expenditure in elections for the House of Commons.

I have previously written about how the ability to ‘charge’ items of local campaigning against the national rather than constituency limit at general elections has enabled parties to hugely – but legally – concentrate extra expenditure in marginal seats. The addition of an extra campaign on the same day – not to mention also elections for many local authorities – will provide yet another means by which extra expenditure can be piled in to marginal seats.

Unless action is taken to significantly reform election expense rules, the days when local campaigning in marginal seats was controlled by expense limits will become a distant memory.

UPDATE: Have just caught (Lord) Tom McNally’s speech to conference where he made very positive comments about pushing ahead with Lords reform, though without contradicting the 2015 election timetable.

Read more by or more about , , , , or .
This entry was posted in Conference and Op-eds.
Advert

5 Comments

  • John Richardson 21st Sep '10 - 9:41am

    some of the unelected could stay in power for many years even beyond that.

    And even longer than that if we end up with party lists.

  • Malcolm Todd 21st Sep '10 - 10:56am

    People on party lists aren’t unelected, they’re just not elected in a way you like.

  • John Richardson 21st Sep '10 - 11:30am

    They’re not elected by or accountable to the electorate. They are appointed/elected by their party. The only say the electorate has is how many appointments each party gets to make. Only those towards the bottom of the list are ever in danger of losing their seats and therefore a Lord/Senator wishing to be appointed for another term must put his party before his constituents. Whatever the advantages of switching to this system are – one thing it will not do is increase the democratic accountability of the legislature. Nick Clegg must push for multi-member STV.

  • Christine Headley 26th Sep '10 - 11:30am

    This is impossible! The GE is meant to coincide with local elections which, in 2015, will include the all-up English districts. Nearly half our councillors, including me, are up in 2011.

    This year, Stroud District postponed parish council elections because they couldn’t have them as well as their own elections (we do it by thirds) and the GE. I believe others in the same boat did the same.

    A GE, local elections and the Second Chamber simultaneously? I don’t think the returning officers will stand for it, and they are definitely a stakeholder to be reckoned with.

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?

Advert



Recent Comments

  • James Brough
    Excellent article. As Mary says, it's just a shame that it needed to be written. Somehow, it seems to have become a worse crime to accuse someone of intolerance...
  • Jennie (she/her)
    ... don't even get me started on supermarket shelves being designed around the 5'8" average male body when I am 5' and quarter of an inch... Most humans of w...
  • Jacci stoyle
    I thought this was an excellent article, brilliantly written and extremely interesting. I also read Invisible Women and was shocked at just how much of women's ...
  • Christopher Stafford
    I think it is wrong to assume that defenders of free-speech are secretly concerned with the promotion of one agenda. This is the party of Mill- that man who mad...
  • Jenny Hazell
    I wonder if the author could give some examples of the sort of speech he thinks needs to be shut down. People who say " how revolting they find LGBT+ people (pa...