SWINDON MP Robert Buckland is among 70 rebel Conservative MPs to sign a letter opposing the plans for the House of Lords reform and calling for “full and unrestricted scrutiny” of the bill.

The coalition Government wants a smaller, 80 per cent elected chamber, with the rest appointed by an appointments commission on a non-party basis.

Mr Buckland says he is not against reform, but believes more time is needed for debate the purpose of the Lords and says the current plans would challenge the sovereignty of the Commons.

The letter warns of “serious concerns” about the proposed legislation, adding that the reforms could “pile a constitutional crisis on top of the economic crisis”. The number is enough to put the Government’s 80-strong majority in jeopardy.

Mr Buckland, the Swindon South MP, said: “I’m not against change, I don’t think what we’ve got is perfect, but we’ve got to decide what the job of the Lords is and I think it’s to revise and scrutinise legislation.

“My worry is if we plough on straight into direct elections, we start changing the nature of what the chamber is all about and it does end up creating conflict with the House of Commons, because the House of Commons is where historically the democratic legitimacy lies, and there are good reasons why we’ve got chambers that are different.”

Mr Buckland said his own preferences included abolishing hereditary peers, removing the power of the Prime Minister to appoint peers, introducing a way of removing peers for wrongdoing, and finding a way to limit the numbers, such as a retirement age.

He said: “My own view is what we need in the Lords is more experts and experienced people who know subjects well and who can use their knowledge and expertise to improve legislation.

“My worry is if you go down the route of having elections, we will end up with another House of Commons and we will lose a lot of the expertise and knowledge.”

Justin Tomlinson, Swindon North MP, has not signed the letter. He said: “I’m supportive of the need to reform the House of Lords, although I personally would have preferred all of the options to be put out to referendum.”

He said a referendum was needed because it was so constitutionally important and also because no MP or peer seemed to able to agree on a way forward, regardless of political party.

Yesterday, deputy prime minister, Nick Clegg, opened a two-day debate on the controversial Government reform plans by describing the Lords as a “flawed institution” which exercises power without legitimacy.