Lib Dem peers blocked a motion that would have allowed a single debate on Andy Burnham’s plans for government. The vote leaves the Liberal Democrats with another example of peers and MPs moving in different directions on major parliamentary questions.
Daisy Cooper and Deputy PMQs
Daisy Cooper was described as doing a better job of holding the government to account at Deputy PMQs than Sir Ed Davey, a comparison that sits awkwardly beside the party’s wider pattern in the Lords. The Liberal Democrats have increasingly supported the government on legislation there, even as Lib Dem MPs have taken harder lines in the Commons.
That split has already shown up on several votes. Lib Dem MPs were highly critical of the Chagos surrender 'deal' in the Commons and voted against the Chagos bill on its third reading, yet no Lib Dem peer put their name to the motion to regret the bill’s passing in the Lords.
Chagos surrender 'deal' and sentencing bill
The same divide appeared again on the sentencing bill, where Lib Dem peers joined Labour in voting down an amendment that would have exempted domestic abusers from the automatic presumption of a suspended sentence. On strike ballots, Lib Dem MPs had backed the Tories in keeping a 50 per cent voter threshold, but peers later reversed that position in the Lords.
That record matters because the party’s recent Lords intake has been unusually large. The Liberal Democrats took five peerages in two recent lists, compared with three for the Conservatives and zero for Reform, and the party’s presence in the Upper House has been described as a long-running Coalition-era hangover.
Andy Burnham in the Lords
This week’s vote on Andy Burnham pushed the same pattern into a new area. Peers stopped a single debate before it could happen, blocking a chance to examine his still-mystical plans for government in one focused sitting rather than letting the issue drift across separate exchanges.
The result leaves the Liberal Democrats with a sharper internal contrast: harder-edged challenge from MPs in the Commons, more mixed voting from peers in the Lords, and another case where the two wings of the party are not reading the same script.
