Your report (One in 10 Tory peers have given more than £100,000 to party, 29 December) and the analysis piece alongside it (The ‘indefensibles’: donors, cronies and lackeys embody case to abolish Lords, 29 January) covered criticism of appointments to the House of Lords and calls for its replacement. However, neither article addressed two key questions: what does the House of Lords do? And does it do it well?
The Lords is a revising chamber that does the heavy lifting of improving legislation that has often been given scant scrutiny in the Commons. It does so through consensus and persuasion. In the 2019-21 parliamentary session 1,029 improvements to the laws that govern us all were made in the Lords; only 83 of those required a government defeat in a vote. Would a second elected chamber be as effective at quietly and expertly making these changes to legislation without getting into a standoff with the Commons?
It is important that appointments to the House of Lords are done on the right basis and steps are taken to avoid the accusation of cronyism. A strengthened appointments commission whose advice was binding on prime ministers could achieve this. A proposal for such a change is available in the form of Lord Norton’s private member’s bill. The government could make real progress by taking up its proposals.
Timothy Kirkhope
Conservative, House of Lords
