[jambutty]

First of all do we need a ‘House of Lords’?
I believe that we do - to curb the excesses of Parliament.

Should it be re-named?
Yes! Suggest ‘Upper House’ or something similar.

Who should be eligible to serve in the ‘Upper House’?
Good question! I would suggest a British citizen without a criminal record who has been a British citizen for at least 20 years and is 40 years of age or older but under 75.

How many members in the ‘Upper House’?
No more than 200.

How should it be populated?
Elect all.
Appoint all.
Elect 50%, appoint 50% or any combination between electing and appointing.
A panel to decide who gets appointed.

Elect the members of the ‘Upper House’ is the only democratic solution. But by whom? Obviously it has to be the electorate.

Appointing to the second chamber (Upper House) is open to abuse, whether it happens or not and the current investigation seems to suggest that some abuse has been prevalent.

A partial appointment still has the same potential of abuse.

Who appoints the panel?

Finally - party politics has no place in the ‘Upper House’. A free vote for all members as their conscience dictates.