Letter: Bishops in Lords
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: Opposing Keith Porteus Wood's salient arguments against retaining the Bench of Bishops in a reformed House of Lords, Philip Mawer (letter, 11 August) uses a phrase coined by a member of another old profession in commenting that, as General Secretary of the National Secular Society, "he would, wouldn't he?" But Mr Mawer is himself Secretary General of the Church of England Archbishops' Council. So he would, wouldn't he?
The whole idea of reforming the second chamber is that a preponderance of large land-owners is not representative of the British population; and church leaders are no more so. Anglican bishops represent a dwindling minority Christian sect, while to augment them with appointees or other sects and religions would only add to the unrepresentative religious bias of the House at the expense of genuine democracy.
BARBARA SMOKER
Bromley,
Kent
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments