THE latest twist in the Tories’ assault on tax credits and those who rely on them saw the House of Lords become embroiled in an argument over whether they were allowed to challenge the Government’s policy.

The response from the UK Government was to establish a review to look into the role of the House of Lords claiming their votes on delaying the tax credit cuts were a “constitutional crisis”.

Although it is ironic that those relying on tax credits might get some alleviation from the cuts via the House of Lords decision, that doesn’t make the case for reform of the Lords any less pressing.

In fact the real constitutional crisis is that in 21st-century Britain an unelected chamber is at the heart of the legislative process.

In any society which claims to be a democracy there is no place for the House of Lords. It really doesn’t matter if now and again it appears to be more in tune with public opinion than the House of Commons, the very existence of this unelected chamber is an insult to democracy.

Both Labour and Tory governments have threatened reform of the Lords but realistically they have only tampered with a system that needs a drastic overhaul. Stuffing an already full chamber with more cronies who match the political preferences of the government of the day is not enough. The Lords, or as it should be renamed, the Second Chamber, has to be elected. There are no ifs and buts about it.

Let’s look at the tax credit debate to highlight some of the issues:

What right has Lord Andrew Lloyd Webber got to come flying in from the US to cast a vote to deny hard working people the tax credits that are essential to keep them from starving or going without?

In his repertoire of musicals and show tunes where is his in-depth knowledge of poverty and how it affects those who are in work but still rely on tax credits to provide a basic income?

Why should a multimillionaire who only has a seat in the Lords thanks to his generous contributions to the Tory Party decide whether or not those relying on tax credits should lose on average £1,300 per year from their measly household income?

And he wasn’t alone in his support for the Tory tax credit cuts – a quick look at Hansard reveals the identities of the Lords who felt cutting the income of some of the poorest in society was a good thing. There were even a few Labour Lords, like the former Labour MP, Secretary of State for Defence and Secretary General of NATO – Lord George Robertson – who lined up to support the tax credit cuts.

Apart from those members who are government ministers and who get extra wages, each member of the House of Lords could claim their daily rate of £300 for casting a vote to impoverish those who rely on tax credits.

The system needs radical reform. This unelected, bloated second chamber doesn’t need more cronies, donors and political placemen who are unaccountable to any electorate. Simply stuffing more Tory supporters into the Lords won’t help anyone. The Lords is already the second-largest chamber in the world with only the National People’s Congress in China being larger – and that serves a country of 1.3 billion people (as opposed to 64 million in the UK).

The current plan by the Prime Minister to carry out a review of the Lords has been handed to Lord Strathclyde – one of the remaining hereditary peers in the Lords. Despite being among the Tory peers who defeated proposals by Gordon Brown when he was prime Minister, Lord Strathclyde is to find a way to stop the Lords from voting against the wishes of a Tory Prime Minister!

The review by Lord Strathclyde is expected to propose only minor changes and not the full-scale reform that is required to bring about an elected chamber. Successive governments, both Tory and Labour, have failed to grasp this issue, preferring to tinker with any problems as they arise rather than look to build a democratic second chamber that would reflect the voting choices of the public. To truly call ourselves a democracy we need a fully elected second chamber. Anything less will not do.

This approach of limited reforms can also be seen in the recent decision to introduce English Votes for English Laws (EVEL), where English MPs now have a right of veto over laws which the Speaker has determined only impact on England.

Effectively, MPs not representing constituencies in England will become second-class members of the House of Commons, excluding them from voting on legislation which could have financial consequences on other parts of the UK. This could result in decisions taken on an England-only basis reducing expenditure on public services in England which could then have a knock-on effect on the Barnett Formula resulting in cuts to the Scottish Block Grant.

Specific examples could include decisions on NHS spending, where the SNP would plan to vote against privatisation of the NHS to protect Scotland’s NHS budget (while helping retain the NHS in England as a public service). Similarly the current debate about a third runway at Heathrow would have significant impact on Scotland’s air routes, yet all Scottish MPs could find themselves locked out of the decision-making process.

The extent of EVEL doesn’t reach the House of Lords. This means recently ennobled Lady Mone of Mayfair and her colleagues are free to turn up, debate and vote on any issue – yet an elected Member of Parliament from Scotland (or Wales or Northern Ireland) such as myself will be excluded from debates that could have far-reaching consequences for our constituents. Never mind the fact that I stood in a democratic election, that doesn’t give me the right to represent my constituents fully. In contrast Lady Mone and her colleagues can saunter into Parliament as and when it pleases them (claiming their £300 per day allowance plus travel expenses) and make decisions on people’s lives safe in the knowledge that they have a job for life and can never be voted out.

The Lords may provide some temporary relief for some people who currently rely on tax credits but the whole farcical system of an unelected chamber at the heart of our legislative process has to go.