Battle ahead over Lords reform

Tony Blair may have the crumbling rail system, the NHS and schools higher on his priorities, but his proposal to create a slimmed-down House of Lords, largely made up of political appointees, could cause some of his biggest headaches this year.

Today the Lord Chancellor, Lord Irvine, presents his White Paper on Lords reform to peers. He will face a barrage of criticism. It would remove the remaining 92 hereditary peers and reduce the total number from 704 to 600.

Only 20 per cent would be directly elected; 120 would be chosen by an independent Appointments Commission and the rest would be political nominations, in proportion to parties' votes at the most recent general election.

If applied now, the Lords, currently comprising 32 per cent Conservatives, 28 per cent Labour, nine per cent Liberal Democrats and 25 per cent independent crossbenchers, (plus five per cent clergy and others), would change to 42 per cent Labour, 32 per cent Tory and 18 per cent Lib Dem. Peers would serve a five- or ten-year term.

To peers of all persuasions, the proposal is the worst of all worlds, and no one can see quite how it would work. To some outsiders, it looks profoundly anti-democratic. Professor Robert Hazell, director of University College London's constitution unit, adds: " Five-year terms would leave members constantly looking over their shoulders to ensure re-election or reappointment."

Another key factor is whether the new Lords should have a stronger or weaker role, being prepared to challenge government and MPs, or acquiesce to them. Several live issues promise battles ahead:

Anti-terror: The rough ride David Blunkett's Anti-Terrorism Bill received last month was an indication of the exasperation peers feel about government attempts to steamroller plans through. Peers delivered five bruising defeats to parts of the Bill, and threw out the plan to make incitement to religious hatred a criminal offence. This may well be revived, possibly as part of an equality Bill.

Faith schools: The Government is pushing ahead with plans to increase the number of schools linked to a specific faith. Peers are concerned such schools can be divisive. Several usually loyal Labour peers are concerned, as are crossbenchers, and the coming month may see an alliance formed. Opposition has been sharpened by last summer's race riots, which in Bradford were partly blamed on segregated schooling.

MPs were promised a free vote on banning hunting with dogs after the first attempt at legislation failed in the Lords, and they want the Government to force it through. Given the political make-up of the second chamber peers are hardly likely to acquiesce to this.

Underlying these issues is the uncertainty over exactly what Tony Blair wants of the legislature. At a time when the Government has been stung by cronyism charges, the fact the largest number of Lords nominees would go to Labour will not inspire confidence. As one peer said: "Even really loyal Labour peers are unhappy."

Trial by jury: A proposal to end the right to trial by jury for many defendants has already been thrown out twice by peers. It is unlikely to become law unless the Government is absolutely determined to force it through. Many senior legal figures, including the Lord Chief Justice, Lord Woolf, are worried by the plan.

Hunting: MPs were promised a free vote on banning hunting with dogs after the first attempt at legislation failed in the Lords, and they want the Government to force it through. Given the political make-up of the second chamber peers are hardly likely to acquiesce to this.

Underlying these issues is the uncertainty over exactly what Tony Blair wants of the legislature. At a time when the Government has been stung by cronyism charges, the fact the largest number of Lords nominees would go to Labour will not inspire confidence. As one peer said: "Even really loyal Labour peers are unhappy."