Blair faces revolt as ministers demand elections for Lords

[emad]

Independent
By Andrew Grice, Political Editor
03 February 2005


Tony Blair is facing a revolt in Cabinet after refusing to bow to increasing pressure from ministers to reform the House of Lords so that between half and 80 per cent of peers are directly elected.

The Prime Minister is being urged by several cabinet ministers to keep Labour's promise to modernise the Lords by including a firm proposal in the party's general election manifesto. Those backing reform include the Chancellor, Gordon Brown; the Lord Chancellor, Lord Falconer of Thoroton; the Leader of the Commons, Peter Hain; the Home Secretary, Charles Clarke; the Trade Secretary, Patricia Hewitt and the Leader of the Lords, Baroness Amos.

Alan Milburn, Labour's election co-ordinator, and David Miliband, the cabinet minister who will draft the manifesto, are also sympathetic to the idea. Mr Blair is digging in his heels but some insiders predict he will be persuaded to back down because he is in a minority in the Cabinet, which will discuss its election strategy today.

The Prime Minister favours an all-appointed Lords. Although he has been accused of packing the second chamber with "Tony's cronies", he does not believe the reform issue will play strongly at the election.
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/story.jsp?story=607247

YEAH, real champion of democracy, Poodle....

[AP]

1. Appointments by someone elected are also a part of democracy, btw.

Nobody in the US thinks that judicial appointments by elected officials are undemocratic.

I guess when you've lived in a country with inherited privilege and power for so long, you sort of forget what "democratic" means.

In any event, they need to water down the House of Lords to the point that it's merely symbolic (and in that case, it doesn't really matter if it's appointed or elected), or they need to make it a proportionally representative elected chamber.

[theboss]

2. If understood Parliament, I may have an opinion on this...

But I thought the House of Lords had little power at this point anyway. If I'm wrong, please correct me.

[yellowcanine]

4. Why should they have any power at all?

[yellowcanine]

3. I guess complete "Democracy" is ok for Iraq but not for Britain? And

why isn't Bush calling for election of the head of state in Great Britain if he loves Democracy so much? That monarchy business is soooo pre 9-11.