Crikey reports that the British Commons voted on several measures to make the House of Lords a democratic house rather than the titled house it is now.
From Crikey's mailer an article by Charles Richardson:
The Blair government had proposed a scheme to elect half of the Lords, with the other half appointed. But it gave its MPs in the Commons a free vote on the various reform proposals, as did the opposition parties. The 50-50 option was overwhelmingly rejected, 418 to 155. So were options for a fully appointed upper house (375-196), for 60% elected members (392-178), and for abolishing the Lords entirely (416-163). Supporters of democracy then swung their support behind a proposal for a chamber 80% elected and 20% appointed. That was narrowly carried, 305 to 267. Finally came the vote on a fully elected upper house, which, to the surprise of observers, passed much more clearly, 337 to 224.Which suggests that the representatives in the House of Commons are not scared of democracy. Good on them. There is a group of British sortitionists, the Lords Reform Institute which advocate the introduction of lot/jury into the upper house. I personally think that sortition is the next political technology which will make its way into the legislative and other branches (outside of the judicial where it is used in juries) in order to improve democratic governance. The Lords Reform Institute has been discussed on SSR before: Sortition for the House of Lords in Britain.
