UK: Is reform of the House of Lords long overdue?

The whole purpose of the Lords is that it is a counterweight to the less positive aspects of a democracy - namely MPs who act in accordance with what will get them votes rather than what is best for the nation in the long term. Party politics can sometimes have a negative effect on decision-making, the Lords acts as a counterbalance to that by being a more deliberative, thoughtful and less populist chamber. With the removal of ALL the hereditary peers, the bishops, etc - all those who have been put there through privilege and birthright rather than earning their place, I don't see why the Lords can't be far superior to the Commons.

Introduce a transparent, accountable process for selecting new Members and we'd be sorted. The Lords would be composed of intelligent, successful people who've earned their place through being the best in their field, people from science, politics, law, education, business, etc, who are learned enough to make the best decisions without being unduly influenced by the party political system. Given the provisions of the Parliament Act the Lords CANNOT ultimately overrule the elected Commons anyway, it can only return Bills to them with proposed amendments, which encourages some of the less well thought out sections of legislation to be reconsidered by the Commons.

Edit: Obviously the above is an idealistic view of how the Lords could look - it's not how it works now, and I don't think this ideal could ever be achieved here, the powers that be lack the willpower and the balls to sort it out. However, that fact shouldn't mean that the only alternative is to scrap the Lords entirely or make it wholly elected, which is tantamount to scapping it and just doubling the number of MPs. That would offer us no protection at all from the less positive aspects of the democratic system.

I fully agree all the titles ,ermine, the name "Lords" and old outdated historical ceremonial makes the UK a laughing stock throughout the world. The second house is required as a revising chamber and should be whittled down to about 300 members wholly elected, but the terms of reference should be carefully mapped out so that it cannot clash with the primacy of the commons. The name should be Senate or something similar to fit modern times.

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.