Skipper

I've argued before in this blog that Blair's legacy on economic management and social justice is something of which he can and should be proud. But his achievements in the field of constitutional reform is seriously threatened by Jack Straw's recent proposal to retain hereditary peers possibly until 2050. The 1997 manifesto declared it would terminate the 'right of hereditary peers to sit and vote in the House of Lords' but in practice it did a deal to ease the passage of reform by allowing 92 hereditaries, elected by fellow peers, to remain.

Since 1999 when this deal was implemented, seven more have joined via 'byelections' caused by deaths among the hallowed rump of 92. Straw seems to think that removing them will be problematic-though the reasons seem unclear to me- and that it might be better either to: allow them to stay until they die; or-not much different- to convert them into life peers. The downside is that such approaches would mean our legislature would probably still retain hereditary peers as late as 2050.

Given Labour's traditional hostility to the Lords and their inability to match their manifesto commitment with appropriate completion, this idea spells merely an extension of an issue which should have been sorted some time ago. Plus it would inflict damage to Straw's reputation with Labour backbenchers which he will need if he is to fulfill his ambition of being elected deputy Leader under Brown. Hereditary peers have no legitimate place in our democracy and it should never have been allowed that 92 of their number to maintain their toe-hold in the first place. Straw's paper should be ripped up before it is ever dignified by any formal discussion.