This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It will not be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/uk_politics/6446887.stm

The article has changed 11 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 7 Version 8
Lords support all-appointed House Peers reject Lords reform plans
(20 minutes later)
Peers have overwhelmingly voted for all members of a reformed House of Lords to be appointed - setting them on a clear collision course with MPs. Peers have rejected plans for a fully elected House of Lords - setting them on a clear collision course with MPs.
Last week MPs voted in favour of 80% or all members of a reformed House of Lords being elected in the future. Last week MPs voted in favour of 80% or all members of a reformed second chamber being elected in the future.
Peers are now voting on a variety of other options, from an all-elected to an all-appointed reformed Lords. But peers instead backed plans for a fully appointed house, voting down other options for reform.
The first vote was on it remaining an all-appointed House. It was passed by 361 votes to 121 votes. Votes are not binding but the division between MPs and peers suggests any attempt to draw up a reform bill will meet months of parliamentary gridlock.
Manifesto On Wednesday, peers backed plans to remain as a fully appointed house by 361 votes to 121 - a majority of 240.
The option preferred by both prime minister Tony Blair and Commons Leader Jack Straw - a 50/50 split between appointed and elected members - was also overwhelmingly rejected by 409 votes to 46. As the votes continued, they rejected each of six other combinations of elected and appointed peers.
The depth of division between the House of Commons and the House of Lords on the future of the Lords suggests there could be months of parliamentary gridlock. PEERS' VOTES 100% appointed: Approved 361 to 12120% elected 80% appointed: Defeated without vote40% elected 60% appointed: Defeated without vote50%/50%: Defeated 46 to 40960% elected 40% appointed: Defeated 45 to 39280% elected 20% appointed: Defeated 114 to 336100% elected: Defeated 122 to 326 class="" href="/1/hi/uk_politics/6339401.stm">Plans at-a-glance class="" href="http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/cm70/7027/7027.pdf">Full text of White Paper class="" href="/1/hi/uk_politics/6449747.stm">Where now for Lords reform?
We have no reason to fear that if we are removed, the world would come to an end Lord Desai Where now for Lords reform?
The votes are not binding - but will be considered by ministers if a reform bill is to be drawn up.The votes are not binding - but will be considered by ministers if a reform bill is to be drawn up.
In theory the Commons could force through changes against the wishes of the House of Lords, but that would be controversial and take up a great deal of Parliamentary time.In theory the Commons could force through changes against the wishes of the House of Lords, but that would be controversial and take up a great deal of Parliamentary time.
The issue then would be whether Gordon Brown, or whoever succeeds Tony Blair as prime minister, sees the reform as a high enough priority to justify the amount of government time it would be likely to take up.The issue then would be whether Gordon Brown, or whoever succeeds Tony Blair as prime minister, sees the reform as a high enough priority to justify the amount of government time it would be likely to take up.
More than 120 peers took part in two days of debate on the future of the Lords on Monday and Tuesday.More than 120 peers took part in two days of debate on the future of the Lords on Monday and Tuesday.
The Archbishop of York, the Most Rev John Sentamu, told peers that elected members would be less independent. His views were echoed on all sides. Commons Leader Straw, who proposed the plans, is battling to reach a compromise with the widest possible backing.
REFORM PROPOSALS A 'hybrid' of elected and appointed peersReduce size of House from 746 to 540 membersEnd hereditary and life peerages over timeElected peers to be voted in at same time as Euro electionsMaximum time in office of 15 years for elected and appointed peersAppointees a mixture of party politicians and non-party figuresLords may be renamed - possibly 'The Reformed Chamber'Anglican bishops and archbishops to keep seats class="" href="/1/hi/uk_politics/6339401.stm">Plans at-a-glance class="" href="http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/cm70/7027/7027.pdf">Full text of White Paper There has been some speculation that some MPs who voted for a 100% elected House of Lords last week did so to scupper plans by ensuring an option unacceptable to either the government or peers was chosen.
Mr Straw, who proposed the plans, is battling to reach a compromise with the widest possible backing.
There have been suggestions that some MPs who voted in favour of a 100% elected second chamber wanted to scupper the plans by ensuring an option unacceptable to either the government or peers was chosen.
Labour's Baroness Symons said she would vote for a 100% appointed Lords, as an elected House would threaten the primacy of the Commons.
She said it would be "misleading to give the electorate the right to vote, without the right of the elected to deliver on that vote".
Labour's Lord Desai, who supports a fully elected House, described the MPs' vote as "revolutionary".
"If we have an all-elected House it will be a new constitutional arrangement.
"All the conventions we have fashioned will have to be carefully examined and we may have to face up to a written constitution.
"We have no reason to fear that if we are removed, the world would come to an end. Perhaps there are other people who could be as good. Let's give the reforms a chance."
Conservative Lord Trefgarne said he was not opposed to reform but only when presented in a more considered manner by the government.
Peers will also vote on his motion to have no change in the composition of the Lords.