Tories Back Lords Move to Strip Starmer of Power to Cancel Elections

Summary: Conservatives are preparing a House of Lords showdown with Sir Keir Starmer over Labour’s decision to cancel dozens of local elections, backing a Liberal Democrat move that would strip ministers of the power to delay future votes without Parliament’s approval.

Why were millions of voters denied a say?

Related: Tory council backs election delay as Labour blocks 4.5 million voters

Labour’s decision to delay 29 local elections scheduled for May has left around 4.5 million people without a vote. Ministers relied on powers under the Local Government Act 2000, which allows elections to be postponed in what the Government claims are exceptional circumstances.

Critics argue those circumstances were stretched well beyond credibility. The cancellations included areas preparing for local government reorganisation, even though replacement unitary councils are not expected to be operational until at least 2028.

What is the Lords amendment and why does it matter?

Related: Labour council leader ousted after bid to delay local elections backfires

The Liberal Democrats have tabled an amendment in the House of Lords that would prevent future election delays unless MPs explicitly approve them through new legislation.

The amendment would not reverse the current cancellations, but it would close the loophole Labour used, shifting power away from ministers and back to Parliament. Conservatives have signalled they are ready to support it.

How are the numbers shaping up in the Lords?

Related: Farage vows legal fight over cancelled elections at London rally

No party has an overall majority in the Lords. Conservatives hold the largest bloc with 282 peers, while the Liberal Democrats have 75. Labour has 230.

For the Government to block the amendment, it would need most of the 177 crossbench peers to side with Labour. That is far from guaranteed ahead of a crunch vote expected in March.

What are the parties saying?

Kemi Badenoch has accused Labour of manipulating the system to avoid electoral losses, arguing voters should always be given their say.

“The electorate should get a chance to have their say… some people are quite happy to delay elections if they think they’re going to lose,” she said.

Liberal Democrat leader Ed Davey has warned that allowing ministers to cancel elections without parliamentary scrutiny sets a dangerous precedent.

“The government of the day must never be allowed the power to simply delay elections and deny voters their right without proper scrutiny,” he said.

Why this fight goes beyond local councils

At stake is a basic constitutional principle: whether elections happen by default, or only when ministers find them convenient. Labour insists the delays are about cost and reform. Opponents see something more troubling.

With Reform UK pursuing a judicial review and the Lords preparing to push back, the argument over cancelled elections is becoming a wider test of how much power any government should have to suspend democracy when the political weather turns against it.