British House of Lords feels chill of modernization By Anna Tomforde

dpa German Press Agency Published: Thursday March 8, 2007

By Anna Tomforde,
London- Given the chequered and bloody history of Britain's
House of Lords since the 14th century, a vote to replace the
hereditary second chamber of parliament with directly-elected members
must count as a near-revolution.
After almost a century of political haggling over "Lords reform",
a vote in the House of Commons (Lower House) late Wednesday has
brought closer the prospect of transforming Britain's last bastion of
birthright privilege into a modern institution.

In what was immediately hailed as an "historic" vote, the Labour-
dominated House of Commons decided with a handsome majority of 113 to
elect - and not appoint - future members of the House of Lords, the
Upper House of parliament.

The vote, which is advisory and not binding, is likely to weigh
heavily in future government legislation on the issue.

The critics of life-long privilege and tradition hailed it as a
possible final blow to an "anachronistic institution," while some
commentators deplored the perceived loss of professionalism and
party-political independence of the Lords.

The Lords, as a revising second chamber, could in future resemble
an institution such as the Senate in Italy or the German Bundesrat -
its red leather benches bare of ceremonial splendour and ermine-clad
nobility in floating scarlet gowns.

"There has been a seismic shift in favour of reform. We cannot put
the genie back in the bottle," said Jack Straw, a former foreign
secretary who, as Leader of the House of Commons, presented the
reform proposals.

However, the decision for a fully-elected second chamber goes even
further than Straw, and other "modernizers" wanted.

Both Straw and Prime Minister Tony Blair were known to favour the
creation of a "hybrid chamber" where 50 per cent of members would be
elected and the other half appointed.

Gordon Brown, Britain's likely next prime minister, is understood
to have backed a third option of 80 per cent elected and 20 per cent
appointed members.

Blair is known to have shared widespraed misgivings that a wholly-
elected Upper House could undermine the primacy of the House of
Commons and become a "rival chamber."

But ironically, the current cash-for-honours scandal, in which
Blair stands accused of having used his exclusive right to propose
peerages to "reward" wealthy party donors, appears to have fuelled
the desire for drastic reform, observers said.

At present, all peers are appointed. As well as the 92 remaining
hereditary peers, there are 26 Church of England archbishops and
bishops and 12 law lords, who sit as Britain's highest appeal court.

Under the reform plans, the size of the Upper House, which could
be renamed "The Reformed Chamber," would be cut from 746 to 540
members, and hereditary life peerages would end.

The House of Lords is expected to put up a long and spirited fight
against the reform plans, which means that their realization will
probably not be achieved during the present parliamentary term,
ending in 2009 at the earliest.

A lot also depends on what priority Brown gives the issue if he
becomes prime minister later this year.

"While practical steps remain to be worked out, the deadlock over
reform has been broken, said Straw Thursday. "It is a dramatic result
in the history of the British parliament."

© 2006 - dpa German Press Agency

Comment Here