This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/oct/28/chris-bryant-government-fashioned-pretend-constitutional-crisis

The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Chris Bryant: Tories have 'fashioned a pretend constitutional crisis' Chris Bryant accuses Tories of fashioning 'pretend constitutional crisis'
(35 minutes later)
The government has “fashioned a pretend constitutional crisis” out of the House of Lords’ decision to delay Conservative plans to cut £4.4bn from tax credits, the shadow leader of the house of commons, Chris Bryant, has said. The government has “fashioned a pretend constitutional crisis” out of the House of Lords’ decision to delay Conservative plans to cut £4.4bn from tax credits, the shadow leader of the House of Commons, Chris Bryant, has said.
Speaking during an urgent debate in parliament on a recently announced review into the relationship between the House of Commons and the Lords, Bryant said: “It’s clear that the government intends to give the House of Lords a kicking, but it should remember – as it fashions this pretend constitutional crisis – that the vast majority of people in this country applauded the Lords on Monday because the [tax credits cuts were] not in the government’s manifesto.” Speaking during an urgent debate in parliament on a recently announced review of the relationship between the Commons and the Lords, Bryant said: “It’s clear that the government intends to give the House of Lords a kicking, but it should remember – as it fashions this pretend constitutional crisis – that the vast majority of people in this country applauded the Lords on Monday because the [tax credits cuts were] not in the government’s manifesto.”
The government launched a “rapid review” led by Lord Strathclyde of how MPs can be given the “decisive role” over key financial decisions on Tuesday, following the government’s Lords defeat over plans to cut tax credits the previous day. Strathclyde said on Wednesday the Lords had acted “wrongly, deplorably and unnecessarily”. The government launched a “rapid review” led by Lord Strathclyde of how MPs can be given the “decisive role” over key financial decisions on Tuesday, following the government’s Lords defeat the previous day over plans to cut tax credits. Strathclyde said on Wednesday the Lords had acted “wrongly, deplorably and unnecessarily”.
Convention dictates that peers do not vote against measures that were set out in a governing party’s manifesto. The government can also override primary legislation blocked by the Lords using the Parliament Act, but this does not apply to secondary legislation, the type used for the tax credit cuts, which can be killed off with a fatal motion.Convention dictates that peers do not vote against measures that were set out in a governing party’s manifesto. The government can also override primary legislation blocked by the Lords using the Parliament Act, but this does not apply to secondary legislation, the type used for the tax credit cuts, which can be killed off with a fatal motion.
The leader of the House of Commons, Chris Grayling, argued that the decision by the Lords to reject a financial measure that had been approved three times by the elected house of commons raised clear “constitutional issues that need to be examined carefully”. The leader of the House of Commons, Chris Grayling, argued that the decision by the Lords to reject a financial measure that had been approved three times by the elected Commons raised clear “constitutional issues that need to be examined carefully”.
He said the government would publish the full details of the terms of reference of the review and the review panel in due course, adding later that the issue of House of Lords reform had returned “very much to centre stage”.He said the government would publish the full details of the terms of reference of the review and the review panel in due course, adding later that the issue of House of Lords reform had returned “very much to centre stage”.
Speaking to BBC Radio 4’s World at One, Strathclyde said he thought the House of Lords had behaved “wrongly, deplorably and unnecessarily”, but dismissed claims that the review was a revenge act on peers. He said he hoped the review’s work would be finished by Christmas.Speaking to BBC Radio 4’s World at One, Strathclyde said he thought the House of Lords had behaved “wrongly, deplorably and unnecessarily”, but dismissed claims that the review was a revenge act on peers. He said he hoped the review’s work would be finished by Christmas.
Related: Osborne may have been defeated by tax credits – but he is in a fighting moodRelated: Osborne may have been defeated by tax credits – but he is in a fighting mood
“My role is to try and give clarity to the conventions that have existed, to look at the choice, because there is no government I can think of since the second world war that would have put up with the House of Lords destroying or stopping in its tracks a piece of legislation, to do with financial matters, a matter of weeks before the Autumn Statement, and a few days after the House of Commons voted in favour of it,” said Strathclyde. “My role is to try and give clarity to the conventions that have existed, to look at the choice, because there is no government I can think of since the second world war that would have put up with the House of Lords destroying or stopping in its tracks a piece of legislation, to do with financial matters, a matter of weeks before the autumn statement, and a few days after the House of Commons voted in favour of it,” said Strathclyde.
Bryant had asked Grayling in the Commons: “Does the leader see no irony at all in getting the House of Lords to review the financial privilege of the House of Commons and for that matter [a review by a] hereditary peer?”Bryant had asked Grayling in the Commons: “Does the leader see no irony at all in getting the House of Lords to review the financial privilege of the House of Commons and for that matter [a review by a] hereditary peer?”
He pointed to an instance in 1999 where a Conservative-led Lords voted down two statutory instruments proposed by the then-Labour government, a move Strathclyde defended at the time, describing the convention that prevented peers from doing so as “dead”. He pointed to an instance in 1999 where a Conservative-led Lords voted down two statutory instruments proposed by the then Labour government, a move Strathclyde defended at the time, describing the convention that prevented peers from doing so as “dead”.
Former Conservative lord chancellor, Kenneth Clarke, asked that there be no delay in bringing forward “legislation that sets out clearly what convention has previously established”. Former Conservative lord chancellor Kenneth Clarke asked that there be no delay in bringing forward “legislation that sets out clearly what convention has previously established”.
“If the Lords keep repeating these party-political votes, it will be almost impossible to have stable government taking firm and difficult decisions for the remainder of this parliament – where presumably they will start misbehaving with ever more frequency,” he added. “If the Lords keep repeating these party political votes, it will be almost impossible to have stable government taking firm and difficult decisions for the remainder of this parliament – where presumably they will start misbehaving with ever more frequency,” he added.