Lords back amendment to parliamentary voting system and constituencies bill insisting that referendum on changing voting system should only be binding if turnout is higher than 40%

This article is more than 9 years old

This article is more than 9 years old

The government was defeated in the House of Lords as peers defied MPs to insist a referendum on changing the voting system for Westminster elections should only be binding if turnout is higher than 40%.

The defeat – inflicted with a vastly increased majority – sets up a further showdown with the Commons as ministers attempt to get the controversial parliamentary voting system and constituencies bill onto the statute book before peers begin their February half-term recess.

On Tuesday, MPs overturned a series of amendments to the legislation passed in the Lords, and both houses were ready to sit late tonight in an effort to end the stalemate.

A protracted session of parliamentary "ping pong" could now take place, with the bill being passed between the two Houses until a final agreement is reached.

Peers voted by 277 to 215, a majority of 62, in favour of the former Labour minister Lord Rooker's move, which would mean that the alternative vote (AV) system for Westminster elections would not be automatically adopted if turnout falls below 40%.

The move was backed in the Lords by just one vote when it was first debated last week, but the higher majority followed speeches in favour of Rooker from Tories including the former chancellors Lord Lawson of Blaby and Lord Lamont of Lerwick and the former cabinet minister Lord Forsyth of Drumlean.

On Tuesday night, the Commons overturned the Lords amendment demanding a 40% threshold for voter turnout by 317 votes to 247, a government majority of 70.

But Forsyth told peers there had been 20 rebels and 25 abstentions among Tory MPs.

He said: "Many of the people who went through lobbies did so out of loyalty and they did so because they were being whipped. And they are ringing us up and saying: 'For goodness sake save us in the House of Lords'.

"It's a pretty pass when the democratically elected chamber has to rely on this chamber."

But the advocate general for Scotland, Lord Wallace of Tankerness, speaking for the government, said having a threshold "seems to dilute the democratic will of the people".

The current stand-off is the latest in a series of setbacks for the bill. It was first debated in the Commons on 6 September last year, but its passage through parliament was held up by a determined effort from Labour peers which saw the legislation's committee stage in the Lords drag on for 17 days.

Ministers accused Labour of adopting filibuster tactics to slow the bill's progress in an effort to derail the government's ability to hold a referendum on its preferred 5 May date.

The bill needs to clear parliament before the recess in order for the Electoral Commission to make preparations for the referendum to take place on the same day as elections to local councils and the devolved institutions.

Labour's opposition focused on plans to cut the number of MPs from 650 to 600, with a redrawn electoral map of roughly equal numbers of constituents, claiming the move would benefit the Tories.

Later analysis of divisions lists showed there were 27 Tory rebels in the government defeat. Along with prominent Conservatives who spoke in favour of Rooker, the rebels also included the ex-cabinet ministers Lord Howe of Aberavon, Lord Tebbit and Lord Mawhinney.

Viscount Falkland was the only Lib Dem rebel.