LibLink: We can’t sit in our golden chamber resisting democracy – Paddy Ashdown responds to attack on reform

In the Mail on Sunday this week, Lord Ashdown responded to Lord Carlile’s article from the previous week, which had opposed Nick Clegg’s plans for Lords reform:

If ever there was a time for a strong democratically based second chamber to buttress our democracy, it is now. Whatever view you take of the Cameron/Clegg proposals, nobody can seriously call them ‘ill-considered’. They were preceded by a Royal commission, four white papers and three joint committees. Every party called for it in their manifestos at the last Election.

The Cameron/Clegg reform Bill does not ‘trash’ the Lords, as some claim – it retains the best of what we have now and discards the worst. The more democratic ‘new Lords’ will remain different from the Commons – they will be more separated from the short-termism of a five-year electoral cycle and less likely to kowtow to the whips and the media.
The Commons will remain more powerful and finally able to get its way if it insists. Which means more democracy, but no deadlock. That’s proper democracy.

Some write of the ‘amazing expertise’ in the Lords. They are right to do so – we have some eminent, independent figures there. But they are far outnumbered by the retired, the rejected, the defeated and the sometimes dead-beat from the Commons.
My colleague Alex Carlile, who wrote in this paper last Sunday, is not a Lord because he is a great legal eagle (which he undoubtedly is), but because he is a former Lib Dem MP. I should know. It was me who recommended him for a peerage.

Read the full article at MailOnline.

Read more by or more about , or .
This entry was posted in LibLink.


  • LondonLiberal 10th Jul '12 - 9:52am

    a good article by paddy. if one wants to retain one’s sanity i would suggest avoiding the readers’ comments below the line. But then again, what does one expect from the Mail on Sunday?

  • The Royal Commission referred to, if it is the same one I’m thinking of, appears to have been entirely ignored in the current proposal for reform. One of the key points of the Wakeham report (2000) was that while they agreed that there was a place for a directly elected element in the House of Lords, they specifically recommended against letting this be a majority.

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.

If you are a member of the party, you can have the Lib Dem Logo appear next to your comments to show this. You must be registered for our forum and can then login on this public site with the same username and password.

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 ...?


Recent Comments

  • User AvatarPaul Walter 13th Dec - 3:20am
    Slight correction: 10,489 majority for Ed Davey. Stonking. Well done Ed and team.
  • User AvatarHywel 13th Dec - 3:16am
    "Lessons to learn?" Yeah. You can't just rock up to a constituency a few months before an election and put together a tactical voting campaign...
  • User AvatarPaul Walter 13th Dec - 3:15am
    Tobias Perhaps look at the bit that says: “ Liberal Democrat Voice’s editors reserve the right to reject or edit any comment, based on our...
  • User AvatarPaul Walter 13th Dec - 3:13am
    Zac Goldsmith beaten by Sarah by nearly 8000 votes!
  • User AvatarPaul Walter 13th Dec - 3:12am
    Tories hold Wokingham comfortably. Ed Davey has a 11k majority!
  • User Avatarchris moore 13th Dec - 3:08am
    Paul Walter 13th Dec '19 - 1:50am Chris Thank you. The relevance is that you can post your views anywhere on the internet. So any...
Tue 7th Jan 2020