Have reforms in the house of lords since 1997 made the uk more democratic?

It is increasingly difficult to justify the House of Lords in its present form and impossible to justify hereditary rights to sit in the upper chamber. On the other hand, the quality of debate and depth of understanding of the House of Lords, especially in matters of science, engineering and technology FAR exceeds that of the House of Commons. Specialist committees in the Lords really get under the skin of a topic and analyse the issues or challenge the assumptions whereas the House of Commons, with its shorter term, political motivations is better at 'grandstanding' than understanding.

I see no reason the upper house should be representative of society as a whole. I want expertise and wisdom, not quotas. I'd rather see the upper house staffed with world class academics, lawyers, business people, moral philosophers, respected elder statesmen and the like than people who lack analytical skills or experience of adding value to society.

Being popular enough to get elected is almost enough in its own right to prove a candidate unsuitable. It is morally wrong that appointments to the present HoL should be motivated by political or financial considerations or by misguided political correctness. If a member of the upper house is not prepared to do what he/she honestly considers in the best interests of the United Kingdom, without political or religious bias, then he/she has no place there.

I agree, having 900 members of the upper house is FAR too many. I'd have thought around 250-300 serving for maximum of 15 years and paid for their services on the same basis as MPs, automatically removed on conviction for crimes of violence or dishonesty, would be about right.

The very reason why the Labour and Conservative Back Benches revolted on this issue is because it would deny most of them with the chance of another money earner, The House of Lords. Titles give a person to earn money in other ways such as seats on the boards of directors. So Members of Parliament are really doing what they do best.

Looking after Number One!

I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.