LETTER : Your jackpot prize - a peerage
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: Your criticism of Lord Cranborne ("Why Labour should send the lords a'leaping", 10 December) rests upon a confusion. Every lottery produces results which, according to some other principle, seem biased. What the hereditary system does for the legislature is to bring in people who are not retired politicians, not those who have reached the top of some other ladder, not invariably in the second half of their lives.
If it is an objection that hereditary peers tend to be landowning males with upper-class accents, the remedy is not to abolish them but to introduce peers with some other sorts of ordinariness. The ancient Athenians used to choose members of the Boule by lot from suitably selected constituencies: in modern Britain the National Lottery is suitably biased away from the upper classes. Why not add to the jackpot a seat in the House of Lords?
J R LUCAS
East Lambrook, Somerset
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments