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: There exists a precedent for compromise between those who, like Lord Richard, would totally abolish the rights of hereditary peers and those like Lord Cranborne who would retain the status quo. It is the Act of Union of 1707, whereby 16 of those with exclusively Scottish titles were to be elected by their peers in Edinburgh at every general election of Parliament. This they did until 1963, when the Peerage Act entitled all Scottish peers to attend and vote, and the system of representation ended.
The House of Lords could be reformed to accommodate a fraction of the present hereditary peerage, elected by their peers of the UK as a whole, thus greatly reducing the hereditary element in the House to a small group sitting there through a combination of tradition and merit.
JAMES ALLAN
Edinburgh
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments