Peers back new slimmed-down House of Lords

PEERS unanimously backed reducing the size of the ‘bloated’ House of Lords last night.

Parliament will now decide how much to shrink the upper chamber and which peers will go.

Lord Cormack, a Tory peer and former MP, warned that its image was that of an ‘over-bloated House with too many members’.

During the debate, former Commons speaker Betty Boothroyd accused David Cameron of ‘tarnishing the reputation’ of the Lords by stuffing it with too many former aides.

Lady Boothroyd said the ‘damage would have been worse’ had the appointments commission not intervened.

The cross-bench peer added: ‘No 10 advisers sent here as lobby fodder do us a disservice. The mother of parliaments isn’t mute.’

Lord Wakeham, a former Tory Cabinet minister, warned not to expect any real reform before Brexit. Independent peer Lord Low of Dalston said the number of peers – around 800 – had ‘spiralled out of control’. Good work was being obscured by ‘excessive appointments, cronyism and sleaze’, he said.

Viscount Hailsham, a former Tory minister, argued for a retirement age of 80. This would lead to 1 peers going at the time of the next election.

Lord Foulkes, a Labour peer, argued that the numbers debate was a ‘diversion’ from the need for radical reform. He called for ceremonial procedures, robes and other ‘archaic’ processes to be axed, warning ‘these things make us look ridiculous’.

Lord Fowler, the Lord Speaker, said after the debate: ‘The House of Lords today has made a unique statement by agreeing unanimously that it should be smaller. This is a signficant step forward.’