This in from Andrew Turner’s office, in their own words. Ed
The Island’s MP, Andrew Turner, has spoken out about proposals to reform the House of Lords. The Bill, published last week, would introduce an 80% elected Lords with the remaining 20% appointed.
Voters would elect Members for 15 years, either by name or by voting for a political party, and seats would then be allocated depending on the position that candidates occupied on the party ‘list’.
Experts wouldn’t necessarily stand for election
Mr Turner commented, “The role of the House of Lords is very different to that of the Commons. The Lords primarily scrutinise and improve legislation. Many Peers bring expertise from their professional lives and a unique depth of knowledge; for instance the Conservative Lady Anelay served on the Management Committee of the Citizens’ Advice Bureaux and Labour’s Lord Winston is a world renowned fertility specialist. I do not think they would stand for election but they bring expertise that we otherwise would not have.
“Of course, if you were going to set up a new institution from scratch, you would not design the current House of Lords. But it works – and these proposals would do nothing to replace the cross-benchers, those Peers with no political allegiance.”
Not wholly averse to reform
He went on to say, “I am not wholly averse to reform; I recognise there are arguments in favour of reducing the number of Peers, however, that does not explain why we should move from an appointed Chamber to an elected one. And the method of the elections would give balance of control to the Liberal Democrats – permanently!
“An elected Lords would have democratic authority and there could be deadlock between the two Houses. The Bill says the House of Commons would have primacy. But it is fanciful rubbish to imagine that elected party politicians with no constituency duties, and a 15 year term of office would be happy just scrutinising what the Commons does.
“To move to an elected House of Lords would, in my opinion, be a big mistake. We meddle with our constitution at our peril. The law of unintended consequences may not be on any statute book but, have no doubts, it is real.
