Where can the Liberal Democrats start to rebuild? How can they reassert their identity as a party with a distinctive philosophy? How do they remind voters that they can make a real difference? The answers can in part be found in an unexpected place.
It’s worth remembering that there are two Houses in Parliament. And, treating cross-benchers as neutral, the House of Lords now has an opposition majority of something like 90-100. Every single piece of legislation that Mr Cameron wants to introduce will not only have to negotiate his own wafer-thin majority in the Commons, but this hurdle in what MPs call “the other place” too.
Here’s where the 101 Liberal Democrat peers can make a difference. Now they are no longer shackled to the compromises of coalition, they can act entirely on the basis of liberal and social democratic principles. They can also be watchdogs for the “one nation” principle that Mr Cameron says he wants to honour.
They will have every right to do so because the number of Liberal Democrat seats in the Commons does not fairly reflect the number of votes the party received. It is perfectly reasonable, therefore, to use the revising chamber to put some balance back, to help to mitigate this disparity.
The House of Lords can do a great deal. It can delay legislation that looks rushed and badly thought-through. It can amend and revise bills that fail to reflect the interests of the nation as a whole. It can even, in some circumstances, entirely derail policies.
Yes, there is the “principle” (it is not a law) that the Lords do not obstruct bills that were in the ruling party’s manifesto. But even that principle might have to be tested and pushed against if a Conservative government with about a third of the popular vote tries to ride right over the views of the other two thirds.
Liberal Democrat peers must be prepared to take an active, campaigning and vociferous role to help safeguard the interests of the great majority who did not vote Tory. They must make common cause with the other opposition parties, and with thoughtful and progressive cross-benchers, to hold this new government to account on its “one nation” commitment.
And they must be prepared to oppose, object and, yes, obstruct, if this government does not live up to that commitment. Let the Liberal Democrat fightback begin with its most experienced, seasoned warriors. Use the House of Lords as a campaigning chamber. Let’s see Liberal Democrat peers take the lead in the fight against the eavesdropping bill, the repeal of the Human Rights Act, the welfare cuts, and the other divisive legislation that is going to come up from the Commons.
Yes, it’s a strange assembly for a liberal and social democratic grouping to use. But it certainly won’t get reformed in this Parliament, so there can be nothing wrong in making it work to its utmost in its present form.
* Mark Valentine is a freelance writer living in Yorkshire
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Violent Bonham Carter features on Fake or Fortune?
Have resignations led to a rethink?
High Fell leaflet watch (2)
Two new Makerfield by-election polls gives Burnham 5 and 12 point leads
Peter Martin
Simon
Ben Austin
Matt Wardman
Neil Hickman
15 Comments
Why do you follow the lazy press cliché of illustrating a story on the Lords with a picture of the state opening which has nothing to do with the day to day work of the House of Lords, and gives the impression that we spend our time dressing up in ermine-trimmed dressing gowns?
Tony
Brilliant-a House of Lords led revival in Lib Dem fortunes. Real democracy at last..
Vote to abolish the gowns and there won’t be any more such pictures.
Bet there would.
The approach suggested would make Cameron wish he’d kept his side of the bargain on reforming the Upper Chamber.
“Yes, it’s a strange assembly for a liberal and social democratic grouping to use. But it certainly won’t get reformed in this Parliament, so there can be nothing wrong in making it work to its utmost in its present form.”
Given we have an upper house with a clear role to perform, there is nothing wrong “in making it work to its utmost in its present form” regardless of circumstances and work put before it by the Commons. Constitutional reform, as history shows us, is generally either a long game or happens very quickly due to conflict.
If you held “real” Liberal values then you would refuse seats in the Lords. The SNP has refused seats.
This is no different to selling your values for a government cabinet car.
The system has seduced you and I hope Scotland continues the clear out next year at Holyrood. The SNP taking the LD offices at Westminter is very symbolic of what is to come in 2016.
Julian Gibb – you forget that Holyrood has PR. Under PR the SNP would have had 26 or 27 seats not 56.
Interesting doctrine that the LDs are entitled to 101 peers because of the number of votes they got in the general election, despite having only eight MPs.
In which case- how many noble lords, sorry, ‘watchdogs’, are UKIP entitled to, making up for nearly 4m votes and only one MP? And how many UKIP peers are there at the moment?
It is embarrassing that Liberal Democrats participate in a forum that is an insult to democracy with no moral right mandated by the citizens to legislate or delay legislation passed by the elected Chamber. If Lib Dem and Labour peers had the courage and backbone to renounce / boycott perhaps the case for abolition and replacement with a legitimate Chamber would become overwhelming. How can you criticise the democratic credentials of Mugabe and Putin whilst participating in this farce. Frankly it is an absolute disgrace to undermine the electorate via this route and I hope voters punish parties that encourage this severely. The one and only thing Lib Dem peers should be campaigning for is their own abolition, nothing else.
Its interesting that if we add the 2 Houses of Parliament together the Libdems have 8% of the members, the same as our vote. Our over-representation in The Lords cancels out our under-representation in The Commons. The Lords are no more “illegitemate” than a “Majority” Government elected by 1 in 3 voters. We tried to Reform The Lords & were stopped by the 2 Establishment Parties so they cant complain if we use the machinery of Parliament against them.
An interesting angle. Honest question: is there anything the Lords could do to encourage a review of the voting system, given the obvious flaws in the current one?
This sounds like a very pragmatic way of dealing with what promises to be a whole raft of divisive and damaging Tory legislation. And for those Lib Dem peers who would rather not use such an undemocratic and anachronistic institution to get their way, perhaps they should consider that exercising such power is the best way of persuading the Tories to reform it!
Back in the world of real politics, let’s remember than nearly 2 in 3 people voted against the new government. So what is this nonsense about democratic credentials and a moral right to push through legislation?
If the SNP had held the balance in this Parliament as they hoped, they would have had to appoint a number of peers if the system was going to work. But that’s “What if” stuff now. What is in the world of real politics is that we are now the pivotal group in the Lords and we have a responsibility to use that position to the best of our abillity.
Tony Greaves
Well Said Tony !!!
Honestly if any Lib Dem comes on here banging on and on about H of L Reform I MIGHT Just Eat my Hat through sheer and utter annoyance !!!!!!
Without the sterling work done by the Peers in the last Parliament the Lib Dems would have become even more discredited and distrusted than they had by the 7th May 2015 !!!
KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!