ComRes House of Lords Reform Survey 17 May 2011

A survey of members of the House of Lords.

Date Published: 16 May 2011

Categories: Energy | Media | Policy Makers | Politics | Technology & Telecoms | UK

Description

 

Members of the House of Lords are set to oppose reform, according to a new poll of Peers published today.

ComRes tested four key options for reform among a representative cross-section of 121 Peers:

Q1.  Would you vote for or against each of the following possible reforms to the House of Lords?

Replacing the current House with around 300 new senators elected by PR
For       15%
Against 78%
DK       7%

• 67% of Lib Dem Peers would vote for this option, but only 13% of Labour Peers and 7% of Conservatives would

A hybrid of one-third election, one-third appointment from civil society, and one-third political nomination
For       20%
Against 68%
DK       13%

• There is fairly uniform opposition among Peers of all parties – 83% of Conservatives, 78% of Labour, and 72% of Lib Dem Peers would vote against

A Secondary Mandate system where the aggregated distribution of votes cast at General Election leads to each party being allocated a proportion of Lords seats from a closed list
For       8%
Against 83%
DK       9%

• Conservatives are keenest on this option but even here only 16% would vote for it, compared to 6% of Lib Dems and 2% of Labour Peers

A change of name to ‘Senate’
For       24%
Against 63%
DK       14%

• 55% of Lib Dems would vote for this, compared to 37% of Labour Peers and just 9% of Conservatives

Q2.  In your opinion, how likely or unlikely is it that major House of Lords reform will be passed during the current Parliament?

Very likely         5%
Fairly likely        17%
Fairly unlikely    58%
Very unlikely     20%

• 55% of Lib Dem Peers, 81% of Labour Peers and 86% of Conservative Peers think reform ‘very’ or ‘fairly’ unlikely

Methodology:  ComRes surveyed a representative cross-section of 121 Peers by self-completion questionnaire between 14 January and 7 February 2011.  Data were weighted to be representative of the House of Lords in terms of party.