Labour MPs call for curbs on powers of Lord Chancellor

Labour backbenchers called for reform and even abolition of the historic role of Lord Chancellor yesterday as pressure mounted on the current officeholder, Lord Irvine of Lairg.

Members of the new Commons Select Committee on the Lord Chancellor's Department, who will hold private talks with Lord Irvine later today, demanded action over his ancient powers.

One Labour MP, Graham Allen, argued that the Lord Chancellor's dual role as head of the judiciary and Speaker of the House of Lords should be replaced by a cabinet minister sitting in the House of Commons. Mr Allen, who represents Nottingham North, tabled amendments to the Criminal Justice Bill to introduce the new post of Secretary of State for Justice.

Meanwhile, the Liberal Democrats announced plans to introduce legislation in the Lords to regulate ministers' pay to prevent a repeat of the recent furore surrounding the Lord Chancellor's £22,000 pay award, although Lord Irvine said at the weekend he would not be taking the full increase.

Lord Goodhart, the Liberal Democrat peer, will introduce a private member's Bill today to peg the Lord Chancellor's salary increase to that of other cabinet ministers. The Bill would amend the Ministerial and Other Salaries Act 1975.

Yesterday Mr Allen wrote to Alan Beith, chairman of the Lord Chancellor's Department Committee, calling on the MPs to launch an inquiry into Lord Irvine's powers.

Labour members of the committee also expressed concern at the Lord Chancellor's wide-ranging powers. Hilton Dawson, Labour MP for Lancaster and Wyre and a member of the new select committee, said: "I'm personally concerned that this is not an elected position and that is something which needs to be addressed. The fact that a Secretary of State is not available to the House of Commons is a concern. There is also his role within the Cabinet where he has a huge task in chairing various committees."

Ann Cryer, Labour MP for Keighley and another member of the committee, added: "If you believe in the separation of powers there should be three quite distinct elements of our constitution: legislature, executive and judiciary. But the Lord Chancellor bridges all three. This is something which has gone unchallenged for years and it's one of the things we need to look at."

Lord Irvine's decision not to take up his full pay rise will cost him nearly £220,000 in extra pension payouts. The Lord Chancellor's Department confirmed that his decision would have an "indirect effect" on his pension because it was based on his final salary. His pension package will now be worth £2.2m, equivalent to about £101,000 a year. If he had accepted the 12.6 per cent rise, it would have gone up to £2.4m.