Lords “sharply divided” on constitutional reform
A special Lords committee has said there is no consensus on the most important parts of the Government’s Constitutional Reform Bill.
In an almost unprecedented move the Lords voted in March to set up a special committee to examine the Bill, meaning that the normal legislative process was halted.
At the time Baroness Amos accused her Conservative opponents of “political opportunism”, saying that the delays were nothing to do with constitutional principles.
The Government is seeking to abolish the position of Lord Chancellor and create a new Supreme Court, which would become the highest court in the land and replace the Law Lords.
The Peers said that “views in the committee were sharply divided” on the two main points, although they managed to reach consensus on a number of other amendments. For example they agreed to the establishment of a Judicial Appointments Commission for England and Wales.
The amended bill will now be debated again in the Lords. As it was first introduced in the Lords it is yet to be debated in the Commons and it is highly likely that it will not now reach the statute books before the next general election.
Conservative spokesman Alan Duncan said that the Government should now drop its plans to abolish the Lord Chancellor or set up a Supreme Court. Mr Duncan said: “The weight of evidence given to the Committee was against the Blair plan to scrap the Lord Chancellor. The Committee was split, reflecting the absence of any consensus for these unnecessary proposals.
“Major constitutional change of this kind, dumping centuries of successful arrangements, should only be made with broad consensus. It is clear that consensus does not exist. Tony Blair and Lord Falconer should drop their half-baked plans. Parliament should review the question again once a new government is formed.”
