My reaction to Lords reform stalling by Tory/Labour MPs in 8 tweets

It’s been a “day of drama” at Westminster much-beloved by the Village, with the Coalition Government deciding in the end to shelve a vote on its programme day motion to introduce House of Lords reform in the face of concerted opposition from rebel Tory MPs and the Labour party.

It’s the first time the Government has backed down in implementing one of its own Coalition Agreement policies. So does that mean Lords reform is lost? Not necessarily, as Unlock Democracy’s Peter Facey makes clear here. However, the repercussions of the Conservative party’s decision to renege on their last three manifesto commitments as well as the Coalition Agreement are likely to reverberate for some time to come. The Coalition will survive, but it’s hobbling now.

Here’s some of my tweeted reaction to the news in the last couple of hours…

* Stephen was Editor (and Co-Editor) of Liberal Democrat Voice from 2007 to 2015, and writes at The Collected Stephen Tall.

Read more by .
This entry was posted in News.
Advert

37 Comments

  • The Tories shafted us on AV, now shafted on Lords.

    Exactly why do we bother supporting lame tory bills on NHS, police commissioners, free schools etc when their adherence to the CA is so tentative

    This was not a good bill, and not worth going to the sword for but we look more and more amateurish in our relationship with the Tories.

    Vince looks like the only competent MP we have and so many more are frankly embarrassing on tv

  • It’s sad but not unexpected. Adversarial politics got in the way. Labour and disgruntled Tories could just smell blood in the water. But I don’t think it’s dead,
    At least the damaging boundary change proposal.s might be ditched.

  • You mention pluralism yet on the single point of the referendum the party are unwilling to compromise. Clegg needs to look in the mirror. Handing Labour a small victory would have given a huge one to the Lib Dems. Makes you wonder whether he really wants this at all…..

  • Redndead – I quite agree. It wasn’t a good Bill, but losing the timetable motion has now made the LibDems look incompetent in the eyes of their coalition partners. The look of pity some Tory loyalists have been giving our MPs in the House says it all. Vince really does seem like our only competent MP at the moment.

  • Richard Dean 10th Jul '12 - 9:12pm

    I suspect in hindsight that the Bill never had a chance. Neither Labour nor the Tories have any interest in making the LibDems look good as a party, which they would have done if this bill became law.

  • This episode has been a watershed for me. Not because House of Lords reform features high in my list of priorities, but that the tribalism and duplicity of the Conservatives has been unambiguously confirmed to me today.

    I am still, just about, for the Coalition. But, if I’m honest, I think the probability of this thing going the distance has been at least halved in my estimation. You cannot have a coalition with a partner party that doesn’t want it too. I suspect many Tories are trying to, de facto, undo the Coalition from the backbenches.

  • It would appear that some Tories think Police Commissioners, who uphold the law, must be elected, but legislators of the second chamber, who make the law, should not be.

  • mpg

    I think that has been clear for a long time

    Also for those of you criticizing Labour as opportunistic I just ask you to step back a minute and think back to opposition.

    Due to this shambles Labour have been handed control of a Government policy! The programme motion or guillotine can only be passed with their support, unless you want an attritional war with the backbenchers.

    Miliband can now use this as leverage to get a referendum or other concessions. Did you really expect him to hand this back just because he is criticized by your leadership or because he wants to be part of a ‘progressive alliance’?

    It would probably have helped your cause if your party leadership had not been so keen to follow the Tory lead in blaming Labour for everything. Even tonight I saw Menzies trotting out the same story – what goes around comes around.

    Remember your biggest ideological and political enemies are sitting next to you on the Government benches and Tories have been shown before to be ruthless – the sooner the leadership realizes this and plays hard ball the better for your chances in 2015

  • The LibDems put their very existence on the line when they supported the Tories’ NHS bill, they (the LIbDems) now discover just how the Tory party behaves. And it is the Tory party who you should be blaming; the idea that Labour should have backed the LibDems as part of a ‘progressive alliance;’ is now nonsense. What ‘progressive’ credentials do the Liberal Democrats now have? The Cuts that hurt the poor most? Commercialising the NHS? Abolishing EMA? Tripling HE Fees? Supporting (in effect) a very dodgy Jeremy Hunt? Supporting the economics of Osborne? and so on. Milliband is not the villain here, for that look to your Conservative partners.

  • Ok so not many of the Great British Public were ever interested in Lords reform.
    But many of those who were banded together over the last three or four decades, and eventually, through sheer hard work, helped persuade enough of that Public to vote Lib Dem that we built the Lib Dems into a party capable of denying either of the two main parties an overall majority.
    Those people still exist. Not all are still Lib Dems. Many who ARE still Lib Dems, like me, are not sure yet whether we can continue to be after the next election. But we still exist, however much the Tories deny there is a demand for this (as if their postbags are representative! Note to Tory MPs – we don’t write to you because we know you’ll oppose an elected Lords tooth and nail. What is the point?).
    We will regroup, and we will overcome you. Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, and maybe not as Lib Dems. You may have outwitted us, and some of our so-called leaders may have connived in that.
    But we WILL have a fairly elected Parliament, one day. History is on our side.

  • This is the usual Labour rubbish, say one thing and do the opposite. They’d be just as untrustworthy as Tories as coalition partners. As for the Tories, hopefully they were told to deliver this or the kitten gets it. Plenty of Tory kittens we can kill off over the next few months as we focus back on the economy.

  • alistair

    Why should they compromise on what they want to do? Your party has hardly looked to build relationships with them since 2010.

    Your party has been used by Blair in 97 and by Cameron since 2010 – the Tories are really crushing you into the ground though

  • Bazzasc – you tell me if Labour support reform or not? Its a simple question.

  • Alistair

    I do not speak for them but I imagine yes – they have been fiddling around with it for years

    What they also have the right to do is make life difficult for the Coalition (based on also the LD behaviour towards them) and use the current situation as a negotiating tool. They did vote for second reading

    Offer a referendum and put the ball back in their court

    If the LD, in opposition, had the same potential power then I imagine they would do the same

  • A referendum on this is nuts, reform was in all the manifestos.

  • I think the Conservatives have proved themselves to be very untrustworthy as partners.

    Labour would have never been quite so cynical in the manipulation and destruction of their coalition partners. Asked so much and given so little.

    It is better not to rush important legislation. I work in a health centre. We have to work with the Mental Capacity Act. A very important piece of legislation that clearly establishes practise and procedure for considering decisions for those with cognitive or physical impairment and who may lack capacity to make decisions.

    It was thoroughly worked out, thought about and carefully consulted, considered and piloted. It is a beautiful piece of legislation that provides an excellent framework for professionals to ensure that a person’s wishes are considered and their best interests met.

    Labour was right to point out that good legislation needed time and should not be forced through. The country will support electoral consititutional reform but it needs to be progressive and extend democracy. It should not be hurried and the proposed alternative reform did not convince the electorate that it was an improvement on what was already in place for a revising chamber.

    Progressive constitutional reform is never going to happen with the Conservatives. The core of the Conservative party are opposed. The only reforms that the Conservatives support is one which entrenches their position or changes the rules to make it easier for them to win or maintain power.

    Perhaps the experience of this coalition will serve some salutory lessons about not compromising on core issues in any future coalition agreements and the need to hold out for reform that the electorate and party can support.

    It remains to be seen that the Liberal Democrats will be able to provide a balance with the 19 to 25 MPs that are likely to be left (after the boundary review) and progressive voters can be persuaded to vote LD after propping a radical right wing Conservative party in this parliament.

  • I would like to say that a major change to the constitutional arrangements needs the support of the population. I want a say. I will support reform, if it is proved to me that the arrangements are an improvement. Consideration of this change must not be rushed through in parliament.

    I would actually prefer an elected second chamber that could provide a break on governments pushing through legislation that was not explicitly spelled out in a parties manifesto mandated at an election. The US balance is actually something to look towards.

    A second chamber that will even more likely divide on party lines, that has no teeth, doesn’t seen to be much good at all.

  • @alistair

    “A referendum on this is nuts, reform was in all the manifestos” – Are your really suggesting that when a party gets elected to office – its supporters approve of each and every item in their manifesto? Far more want to come out of the EU or halt immigration than want Lords reform. Parties that don’t offer these policies still get elected because the economy is nearly always the electorates primary concern – so they vote based on who they think will manage this the best.

  • Simon Bamonte 10th Jul '12 - 11:49pm

    @Alistair: “A referendum on this is nuts, reform was in all the manifestos.”

    Labour actually called for a referendum on Lords reform in their manifesto.

  • Ryan Dungallon 10th Jul '12 - 11:50pm

    The poor old Lib Dems have slavishly supported the Conservatives on all the unpopular polices that the public did not support like the health service reform. What have they got in return? These policies would never have got through without the Lib Dems ignoring the electorate and voting with the Conservatives. They have treated Labour like something nasty on their shoe. They have never supported Labour on any vote, i.e., Hunt, a judge led public enquiry on the banks. Why then should Labour support the Lib Dems? The lesson is, one should not put all ones eggs in one basket, and there is a need to cultivate friends in politics. It is clear that the Conservatives are now tired of the Lib Dems and have no loyalty to them, at the earliest opportunity they will be dispensed with like turkeys at Christmas. And what about the public? Well unfortunately the Lib Dems have totally ignored the voter’s views, seemingly blinded by the novelty of power. Lesson number two, it is the electorate who made them MPs and what is given and also be taken away.

  • So:

    We didn’t stand up for the young, when it came to tuition fees.

    We didn’t stand up for the sick, when it came to NHS privatisation.

    We didn’t stand up for the disabled, when it came to benefit cuts.

    We didn’t stand up for the poor, when it came to an increase in VAT.

    But we did stand up stoutly in support of our own interests, when it came to setting up an elected House – in which we could expect to maintain a permanent stranglehold on the balance of power.

    Unless, of course, too many of our former supporters have abandoned us in disgust.

  • Simon Bamonte 11th Jul '12 - 12:16am

    I was a firm supporter of the coalition at the start. I knew we would have to make sacrifices, but I also actually believed we’d keep the Tories in check. Sadly that has not been the case and ever since the tuition fees fiasco, I’ve been telling anyone who would listen that they (our Tory “friends”) are simply using us. And those in the cabal at the top of our party (Clegg, Alexander, Laws, etc.) either became blinded by power or actually agreed with the Tories on most of their plans, many of which were not properly put to the electorate). We as a party have simply been used by them to push through their regressive, illiberal policies which hit the most vulnerable the hardest. The Tories, by and large, will never be in favour of proper reform. They never have been. They are the establishment personified. As for Labour, while often acting with sheer opportunity, have actually been reasonable on Lords reform. I think they’re doing what we would be doing had we still been in opposition. I see nothing wrong with not setting a time limit on debate for an issue as important as major constitutional change. There are very few arguments to be had against allowing the public a referendum on the issue and by being consistent with their manifesto call for a referendum on Lords Reform, we have no right to attack Labour for their continued desire to hold one.

    If we want to make this work, we will have to negotiate with Labour and if a public vote is a requirement, then so be it. We are democrats; we should never be afraid of putting such an important issue before the electorate.

    Look: we’ve lost public trust and millions of votes because of tuition fees. Because we went against public, not to mention the majority of party opinion on the unwanted NHS bill. We’ve shafted the disabled, presided over a double-dip recession and sat on the fence when forced to take a stand on alleged Tory corruption (the Hunt vote). If the Tories completely derail Lords reform, then every day we stay in this coalition is an inch further into our political graves. We lost AV. We’ve lost so many voters. If we lost Lords Reform, then we’ve pretty much received nothing out of this coalition.

    I fear there will be books written in the future on how not to work coalition government. And, sadly, this will probably be what the Lib Dems 2010-2015 will be most remembered for.

  • The Lib Dems do need to realise that, as Stephen W says, about a quarter of Tory MP’s are “hard right”, a parliamentary faction larger than the Lib Dems. The coalition is far more complicated than an agreement between Cameron & Clegg. There are basically UKIP MPs in the commons. Plenty of Conservative MPs would be happier with UKIP’s manifesto than Cameron’s, let alone the Coalition agreement.

    This faction wasn’t included in the coalition negotiations, didn’t sign the final agreement in their own capacity, and they didn’t get ministerial roles in return for their cooperation. All for the perfectly good reason that they were signed up Conservatives, but its still the reason why the Coalitions is having problems with Tory rebels. It’s a whole nother party in the coalition, and one that Cameron has always struggled to deal with. It extends down to the Conservative supporters and voters where its not an uncommon view that Cameron is a traitor willingly leading a social democratic government (the mirror of those on the Left who say Clegg is a traitor willingly supporting a Thatcherite government).

    Lib Dems disillusioned with the Coalition need to look at the other side and see that many Conservatives feel exactly the same way. Both sides claim that the other is dominating the government, breaking the coalition agreement, and that they’ve got nothing, or next to nothing, out of the coalition.

  • Paul McKeown 11th Jul '12 - 2:21am

    Retirement sinecure? Easy cure: cut daily rate from three hundred sovs to a tenner. The retired lardy arses will soon be looking for other, more rewarding, leather upholstery to polish.

  • Did any of you see David Law’s performance on Newsnight last night – for a supposed star I thought he was very poor

    I particularly liked the way that he demanded that Khan tell him what Labour’s position was on the Programme Motion – tell me again when he became your party’s representative on Constitutional Reform. Quite a strange approach for a simple (and cheating) backbencher

  • @Ian Sanderson (RM3)
    “Tripling them again by the Coalition was following Labour precedents ”

    Ah, that’s alright then.

    I’m sorry, but the tuition fee debate is about two subjects. The first is scale: (a) how much do graduates need to contribute beyond the extra fees and taxes they pay to subsidise all other taxpayers? The second is (b) the distribution of contributions across the graduate income scales.

    Tripling something does not have moral equivalence to another group that have already tripled the same thing. A much more accurate description is that the coalition are happy with fees at 9 times the pre-2006 level, whereas Labour increased them to 3 times the pre-2006 level. You are three times as bad as Labour, not the same.

  • @bazzasc
    “Did any of you see David Law’s performance on Newsnight last night – for a supposed star I thought he was very poor”

    To my mind, Laws’s vast intellect is one of the mysteries of the universe. I’ve yet to see evidence of it, but I keep hearing about it. There are plenty of right-wingers who I appreciate and have time for even if I don’t always agree with them – I can understand where they’re coming from and appreciate their motivation and their logic. I’ve never heard Laws say anything particularly insightful or original though. I presume all the people that proclaim his greatness are doing so simply on the basis that he is (a) prominent in the Lib Dems and (b) he shares the same ideology as they do.

  • Coalitions are supposed to be about give and take; to deploy a cliche, we give, they take. Forget it, this is not an honest bargain nor are we being dealt with fairly. Coalition government is a great and noble idea, but we have very little indication that the Tories understand the discipline it requires. Time to head for the exit.

  • Paul in Twickenham 11th Jul '12 - 8:01am

    Like most of you, I woke up this morning to an email in my inbox from Nick Clegg. It was on the subject of “Reforming the House Of Lords”. I got as far as “a great triumph for our party” and lost the will to live – or at least to continue reading.

  • @Paul – I entirely agree. This is a load of nonsense. It would be like Napoleon claiming that Waterloo was a tremendous victory because he lived through the battle and St. Helens isn’t a bad place, really.

  • Pardon me, St. Helena.

  • If Cameron can’t deliver his MPs, the Tories should pick a leader who can.

  • David Evans 11th Jul '12 - 8:30pm

    The Tories picked a leader who can deliver our MPs. The question is, who will be the first to tell Nick his plan has failed and it’s time to head for the exit.

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

  • Craig Levene
    Chris , 380 billion relates to the Wests aid. There is nothing wrong in asking how you get to a position that would be acceptable to Ukraine. It's position is ...
  • Ambighter
    Only a small point, but it is defence not defense in British English, or has Donald Trump banned that too and I just didn’t hear about it?...
  • Chris Moore
    And how dare those awful Ukrainians invade Kursk, part of Mother Russia? How much is that costing the British taxpayer? Disgraceful behaviour....
  • Chris Moore
    Btw: UK government figure of 12.8bn for total UK aid to Ukraine since the start of the war. What a shame Putin's surprise attack didn't take Kyiv on the fir...
  • ChrisMoore
    I entirely agree with Craig Levene: what a waste of money and life defending a country against an aggressor. How unrealistic and silly to want one's country ...