The public comprehensively rejects government plans for Lords reform, finds a survey published on Tuesday.

The white paper on the second stage House of Lords reform is already set for a hostile reception in both houses of parliament and faces tough opposition from parliamentarians of all political parties - an outlook backed by the British public according to an ICM poll commissioned for the Joseph Rowntree Trust.

Lord Smith of Clifton, who is set to present the findings to peers during a Lords debate on Thursday, described public consultation on the reforms as "desultory" and predicts isolation for the government.

"The majority of people want, at the very least, a majority of elected peers as opposed to appointed - and that has remained pretty constant. They also want the House of Lords to have effective powers," the Lib Dem peer told ePolitix.

Over half the public, 54 per cent, back an elected or predominantly elected second chamber, finds the survey, with only 14 per cent backing a government style formula of a minority elected, majority appointed House of Lords. An overwhelming opposition ratio of nearly four to one.

Voters are particularly hostile to prime ministerial patronage of appointed members with 83 per cent backing an independent commission to have the final say "if there are to be appointed members".

Over three quarters believe a reformed Lords should have "substantial powers to check government legislation and over half want the second chamber to be able to "indefinitely" delay laws until both houses of parliament can agree.

Campaigner and director of Charter 88, Chris Lawrence-Pietroni, responded to the poll and called for more debate.

"It is now very clear that the public do not support the government's proposals for reform of the House of Lords. Yet the government has limited public debate on this vital issue by running a three month 'consultation' which has fallen over the Christmas break," he said. "With such clear hostility to the white paper, the government should take a step back and allow time for a proper consultation period, leading to a second chamber that engages rather than excludes electors."

Lord Simon argued that the government is now so isolated on the issue that compromise on the controversial proposals seems inevitable.

"They've got so much opposition, the only people supporting [the white paper] are the Lord Chancellor and Tony Blair," he told this website. "Even Lord Wakeham has criticised it for diluting an extremely moderate set of proposals he himself put forward."

The Lib Dem peer also rounded on the government's "ridiculous" failure to reduce the large number of appointed life peers in the present house - currently numbering 587.

"We should all be evicted, none of us should be here unless elected, I would cull the lot," he said. "It is all very well to get rid of all the hereditaries but if Tony tried to get rid of any of the life peers they would have a limpet like tenacity which no mollusc in the oceans have in hanging on."