End of the peers?
Sir: You describe the hereditary principle in the House of Lords as "indefensible" (leading article, 15 October). In what way is it indefensible for children to inherit talents, abilities and wealth from their forebears? Is it indefensible to exercise these talents, abilities and wealth for the benefit of others?
How many times in the past few decades have the peers forced the Commons to think again and to revise ill-considered legislation? Is the record of the hereditary peers any worse than that of the lobby fodder in the Commons? Do I detect an element of envy in these proposals to deprive the hereditary peers of their limited powers?
I have observed no sign of revolutionary fervour, except among a few members of the chattering classes. If the present system works, why tamper with it? The government of the day has quite enough power as it is: don't give it more by destroying the limited power of the Upper House.
Sutton-in-the-Isle, CambridgeshireReuse content