Peers cheapen Parliament

The integrity of politicians has been under media and public scrutiny in this country and abroad ever since democratic systems of government began. The focus in Britain has rightly been mainly on MPs.

But last week allegations about four Labour Peers apparently willing to accept cash to lobby to change laws was profoundly shocking.

If these allegations are true, those involved have shamed the House of Lords and undermined confidence in Parliament generally. The code of conduct is crystal clear in banning paid advocacy. The code says: 'Members must not promote any matter in return for payment'.

But unlike MPs, at present Peers cannot be suspended from the House of Lords, no matter how badly behaved. This is wrong and Conservatives have committed to change it. David Cameron has set up a committee to advise him on the issues of lobbying, consultancies, declarations and procedures.

Everyone should have confidence that members of both Houses of Parliament are working hard, declaring their expenses and allowances properly and are open in all the declarations they make about any outside interests.

The whole question of the composition and role of a second chamber is once again in the spotlight. Labour has stalled and dithered on Lords' reform and has not fulfilled its 2001 General Election manifesto commitment to create an elected, democratic and representative second chamber. When MPs voted on this in 2007, I voted for a wholly elected House. If this were to happen Peers would also have to be paid.