Lords throw out supreme court plans

The Government was plunged into confusion today after peers voted down plans to abolish the post of Lord Chancellor and set up Britain's first supreme court.

An alliance of Tory and crossbench peers was enough to inflict a 216-183 defeat on ministers' flagship proposals for reform.

The Constitutional Reform Bill will now be sent to a special Lords committee for "extra scrutiny" - effectively a wrecking move which leaves the plans in tatters.

Leader of the Lords Baroness Amos hit out at Tories and crossbenchers, accusing her opponents of "political opportunism".

Ministers were mired in confusion over what to do about the embarrassing defeat.

Before last night's vote, Commons leader Peter Hain vowed simply to bring out a new Bill along exactly the same lines as the one defeated by peers and railroad it through Parliament after 12 months.

This could be done by using the Parliament Act - a " nuclear option" which ensures the supremacy of the Commons over the Lords.

But, significantly, there was no confirmation from Downing Street that this would be the way ahead.

Tony Blair was said to be furious that his key plans to reform the constitution had been blocked and the issue is certain to become a major battleground in the run-up to the next general election. Last night's defeat came despite a call from Lord Chief Justice Lord Woolf, one of the Bill's most outspoken critics, for the plans not to be delayed indefinitely.

He clashed with former law lord, Lord Lloyd, a crossbench peer, who pressed for the Bill to be sent to committee.

He said a closer look was needed at the costs of a supreme court, adding: "It's not too late to save the office of Lord Chancellor - that's what I hope we shall do." And despite an alliance with the Liberal Democrats, Labour failed to win over doubters.

Baroness Amos said: "Make no mistake, tonight's events have nothing to do with constitutional principle and everything to do with political opportunism."

But Tory Lords leader Lord Strathclyde said: "Any suggestion that the views of Commons and Lords on scrutiny should now be by-passed by withdrawing this Bill and laying a new one would be an act of petulance". He added that it would be "the mark of a government unwilling to listen to the voice of Parliament".

The Bill seeks to establish a new independent commission to appoint judges and to scrap the committee of law lords in the House of Lords which currently acts as the court for final appeal.

The proposed reforms would leave that job to a new supreme court working completely separately from Parliadespitement. The Government says that change will protect the independence of the judiciary and set clear boundaries between politicians and judges.

Opening the debate, Lord Chancellor, Lord Falconer, said sending the Bill to a special committee could mean MPs never had a say on the issue.

The current system had worked well in recent years but one failure would undermine it, he said.