I noted with interest the headline about Lords reform ("Lords reform plans call for 80% elected chamber", The Herald, April 24).

There are some who have cherished the aspiration that at some time in the future the UK will evolve into what is known as a class-less society. Then a man will be measured more by his own attributes and the contribution he makes to overall wellbeing rather than by the wealth and so-called status of his forebears and what old school tie he is entitled to wear.

The current set-up and membership of the House of Lords is one of the impediments to the realisation of that aspiration.

The nettle should be grasped now and reform should incorporate the following measures:

l The removal of the remaining rump of 92 hereditary peers. There can be no rational justification for persons having the right to have influence over the lives of the people of the UK on the basis of birth.

l The removal of the Lords Spiritual, who take up seats in the House of Lords because of their ecclesiastical role in the Church of England. Their position in the Lords is anachronistic and continues to show preferment to occupants of posts representing only one strand of religious persuasion.

l The titles of Lord, Baron and Baroness held by those sitting in the Lords should be abandoned. Such nomenclature not only confers on some people a certain illusion of grandeur but also helps to underpin the class system, which continues to damage the image of our country and colours the reality of living in it. The fancy dress should also be dispensed with. In the future such people should be known as senators or representatives.

l The right of patronage exercised by the Prime Minister and other political party leaders should cease, thereby bringing an end to the temptation to confer such honours on friends for services rendered, or party hacks, or MPs for agreeing to move out of their parliamentary seats. Such a step would also eradicate the possibility of such positions being made available at a price.

All of this brings one to the conclusion that all members of the proposed new second chamber should be elected by the people and thus be answerable to them for their conduct.

It is useful to remind ourselves occasionally of the words of Winston Churchill: "It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried."

Ian W Thomson,

38 Kirkintilloch Road,

Lenzie.

The debate about reform of the House of Lords is confusing because solutions have been proposed before we have a proper exploration of the principles for reform.

The hereditary principle has been curtailed but not repudiated. The democratic principle is too readily confused with populism. Instead of a referendum about the proposed solution, could we have one about the principles from which criteria can be derived to weigh up the options?

A second chamber should serve a different function to the first. It should scrutinise proposed legislation to examine the effect on minorities, as well as the majority. It should examine the need for safeguards for people who are powerless and vulnerable. It should examine aspects of society that challenge the power and status of political parties.

I doubt if this can be achieved by having members of political parties elected directly in the same way as the first chamber.

Members of a second chamber should have the expertise to deal with a wide spectrum of subjects in as much detail as possible. It should be composed of people who are respected for their ability to analyse society's issues, rather than their electoral success based on popularity or conformity to a political party. This could be achieved by having its members nominated on the basis of the respect they have gained for their expertise in relevant fields.

Democratic accountability may be achieved by having nominations made by bodies in society (rather than individuals) chosen by election. The electorate could choose which bodies (such as universities, churches, trade unions and so on) should make time-limited nominations.

Neill Simpson,

3 Lochmill Holdings,

Milton of Campsie.

The economic climate is of concern to many families, there is a shortage of apprenticeships for young people and generations are growing up in areas decimated by unemployment.

The petty thief from a troubled background and the benefits cheat are rightly punished but it is unfair that convicted criminals have retained their titles and the perks that go with them. Those who accept advantages must also accept the responsibilities that go with them or be held accountable if they do not.

Titles are an anachronism in the 21st century and should be scrapped. The House of Lords could become an elected second chamber. The members of both houses must be forcefully informed that they are there to represent the electorate, not to promote themselves or waste time on juvenile barracking.

Norma J Morrison,

Millig, 29 Colquhoun Street,

Helensburgh.