House of lords

One instructive way to think about Tuesday’s vote on Lords reform is, do you want to have proportional representation used to elect people to the Westminster parliament? I suspect that most people on the centre-right would answer no to that question, and with good reason. In the current British system, PR would work against the centre-right’s political interests.   It is for this reason that the term rebel is a bit of a misnomer for those Tories trying to thwart the coalition’s plans for Lords reform. The likes of Andrew Griffiths, an adviser to Eric Pickles when he was party chairman, and Angie Bray, a former Central Office staffer, are

That the Liberal Democrats might try to scupper the boundary reforms if they don’t get their way on Lords reform has been the talk of the tearooms in Westminster for months. But today the threat comes to the fore as Nick Clegg’s departing head of strategy Richard Reeves warns the Independent that there will be ‘consequences’ if Tory MPs try to block reform of the upper chamber by voting down the Government’s programme motion for debating the legislation. This is what he told the newspaper: ‘There would be broader consequences for the Government’s programme, particularly around political and parliamentary reform. The idea that a failure to deliver a government commitment

Last night a group of Liberal Democrat and Conservative MPs met to discuss Lords reform. Public outbursts from the Conservative backbench have so far focused on opposition to the bill and the programme motion that the whips are trying to impose on the legislation, but the group of pro-reform MPs, who have informally dubbed themselves the Democratic Majority, are optimistic that the legislation will make a successful passage through the House of Commons. There are 27 Conservatives on board at the moment along all the Lib Dems, standing up the list of 100 MPs that the rebel leaders claim to have among their number. Ringleader Jake Berry, a member of

House of Lords reform? Most politicos are debating whether to elect senators or maintain the status-quo. Not so the Kensington, Chelsea and Fulham Conservatives, who held an evening discussion about whether the Lords should return to the hereditary principle. Mr Steerpike hears that it was a popular motion. Leading the charge was James Bethell, head of Westbourne Communications by day and 5th Baron Bethell by night. Lord Bethell stated that his great-grandfather bought his peerage for £10,000 in 1922. He said that the sum works out at over three million pounds in today’s money, which appears to be much more than the asking price for an elected seat.

At the first meeting of the 1922 Committee following the 2010 election, I was the only new MP to speak. I used my time to set out why I would support a coalition: the country was in an economic crisis and at war; we knew what needed to be done – deal with the debt and radically reform education, welfare, local government, healthcare and defence; and we knew no one else was going to do it. In the following two years my rebelliousness has stretched as far as two abstentions on votes against opposition amendments. The first was on a Labour amendment to extend national insurance contribution holidays for start-ups

The concessions that David Cameron has reportedly offered the Conservative backbench on Lords reform are really not sufficient to keep them out of the no lobbies. Switching from a salary to a daily attendance allowance, which would keep peers’ earnings below £60,000 in most cases, is hardly going to set the benches alight. The reason for this is mainly that Tory MPs are opposing Lords reform as much for reasons of principle as they are for personal reasons. This is a deeply personal row with the Lib Dems that was a bit awkward and grumpy a month or so ago, but has turned to full-blooded revenge over the party’s refusal

The coalition’s plan for House of Lords reform will go to Cabinet on Tuesday. It could have a trickier time there than expected: some Tory Cabinet ministers who favour an elected Lords are deeply unhappy about the idea of using regional lists. But, even before Cabinet, one active Tory big beast has come out against the proposals. Boris Johnson savages the idea in his Telegraph column, declaring it to be ‘a bunch of tidy-minded Lib Dem nonsense.’ He makes the standard Tory arguments against it: the Lords works as it is, two elected chambers would inevitably clash and reform will just expand the numbers — and cost — of the

Opponents of an elected House of Lords have been flexing their muscles in the last few days. Yesterday, Archie Hamilton, a Tory peer and former chairman of the 1922 Committee, and a sceptic of the coalition’s plans for an elected Lords, put down a manuscript amendment on the Financial Services Bill, on which the government was defeated. This means that the bill will have to go through a full committee stage. This is just a little indication of how much more difficult the coalition could find getting its legislation through the upper house once the Lords reform debate has started in earnest. So much of the proceedings in the Lords

Yesterday saw the annual Commons vs. Lords Tug of War, in aid of Macmillan and sponsored by BAE. Battle was joined at Westminster College Gardens, behind the cloisters of Westminster Abbey. Teams of marines, fireman, hacks and staffers battled it out before the final show down between the elected and the unelected. Disappointingly for the aristocracy, the commoners bagged it.    Champagne and the dulcet tones of TV’s James Landale kept the crowd entertained. Speaker Bercow, defence minister Gerald Howarth and education minister Tim Loughton cheered on their colleagues, while Labour’s Lord Foulkes and Sharon Hodgson became well acquainted with the bar. Tory backwoodsmen Alec Shelbrooke, the loud Yorkshire MP,

If David Cameron had a list of headlines he doesn’t want to see, I’m sure ‘Top Tory in expenses scandal’ would be near the top of it. Yet that’s what he, and we, will read this morning on the cover of the Sunday Times (£). The ‘Top Tory’ in question is Baroness Warsi, co-chairman of the party. And her offence, apparently, is to have claimed expenses for overnight accommodation while staying for free in a friend’s house. Warsi has more or less denied the accusation, saying that she did stay at the property on ‘occasional nights’ as the guest of a party official — but made an ‘appropriate payment equivalent

Generally speaking, Philip Hammond is one of the Cabinet’s quieter members; a sort of human calculator designed to run a department efficiently and with the minimum of fuss. Which is why his interview with the Sunday Times this morning (£) is so eye-catching. There’s very little that’s understated about it at all. ConservativeHome’s Matthew Barrett has already put together a useful summary of the main points, so suffice to say that Hammond is dismissive about both Lords reform… ‘He believes the upper chamber “works rather well” as it is and that voters are “probably largely indifferent” on the subject.’ …and gay marriage: ‘He believes gay marriage is too controversial for

The Queen’s Speech commitment that ‘A Bill will be brought forward to reform the composition of the House of Lords’ is a lot vaguer than theLiberal Democrats were hoping for, or expected just a month or two ago. Crucially, there is no mention of the second chamber being elected. If this was not enough, the bill’s place in the speech — it was the 16th piece of legislation mentioned — sent out the signal that it is not a government priority. It appears that the Tory sceptics of Lords reform have won the opening battle. This impression is bolstered by the fact that leading Tory opponents of Lords reform are content

Today’s Cameron-Clegg event was meant to be very different from the one in the Downing Street garden two years ago: grittier, more real. Watching it, one was struck by the fact that the two leaders still seem comfortable in each other’s company. The dynamics between them are better than those between Blair and Brown two years in. But, thanks to the compromises of coalition, they lack a compelling growth message for the here and now — as opposed to the long term — at the moment. One of their other problems is that coalition makes everyone focus that much more on the political process. The ears of every journalist pricked

Have our politicos looked at last week’s turnout numbers, and thought ‘y’know, we might be a bit cut-off after all’? Reason I ask is because they’re all tripping over themselves today to downplay the significance of Lords reform, and focus the conversation on The Issues That Actually Matter. This, as James said earlier, is what George Osborne has been up to throughout the day. Ed Balls did likewise during an appearance on the Sunday Politics with Andrew Neil. And, most significantly, even Vince Cable echoed their sentiments in his interview on Sky’s Murnaghan Show. ‘We need to just quickly and quietly get on with this,’ he said of reforming the

Yep, they’re inescapable, those Lib Dems. Even when the airwaves are dominated by Rupert Murdoch and Tom Watson, they’re there in the background, quietly adding to the day’s pile of political news. We’ve got Ken Livingstone making a pitch for their votes in the London Mayor’s contest, for instance. And we’ve also got Nick Clegg on what seems like every radio show on air, giving his account of why folk should be Lib Dem voters in the first place. There have been two more significant scraps of LibDemmery than those, though. The first came in one of Clegg’s radio appearances, when he said that he isn’t ‘hung up’ on who

Here, CoffeeHousers, is this week’s episode of The View From 22 podcast. Thank you for the continued feedback, we’ve tried to take as much as possible into account. In this episode, Fraser looks at the London Mayoral race and whether Boris can still bag it (0:26), given the downturn in the government’s fortunes. Tanya Gold, our restaurant critic, reports on how Ken and Boris have been faring on the stump. James Forsyth discusses (8:07) the fall of Jeremy Hunt and the Murdoch appearances at Leveson, as well as the trouble brewing for Cameron over Lords reform (15:30). You can listen below with the embedded player or — even better —

Further to James’s post on the Cameron interview, here’s what jumped out at me: 1. ‘Governments have difficult months. This government came together to dig this country out of the huge economic mess that it’s in…’ This is the official No.10 explanation about the last few months; that it’s the problems of the austerity agenda. As James Forsyth says in his political column in the current magazine, there are strongly-held alternative explanations. 2. ‘We’re not just a bunch of accountants dealing with the deficit…’ Cameron kicks off with this, an interesting phrase as it has been used by those criticising his Chancellor’s economic message. Osborne’s critics says he no agenda