content: On digital issues, there is a problem with the grey hairs that make up both houses, voted in or other wise. Most don't even have a clue how clueless they are. On other issues, if you watch BBC Parliament, you find the house of lords often talks a lot more sense, and certainly in a much more reasoned thought out manner. The house of commons is depressingly populist political point scoring, almost just rhyming sound bites about each others mums. We remove the house of lords at our peril. Yes hereditary peerage is stupid, but some of them do actually take the role seriously and do well, so we should be careful about removing existing lords regardless of how they got in. I would change it, but I'd change it very carefully. There is lots of low hanging fruit that would improve it without throwing it away. At the end of the day, the house of lords is weak. It can only push things back to parliament, not stop it, and it can only push something back 3 times, and some stuff it can't even do that. But it does slow stupid populist rubbish becoming law. Hopefully slower enough that the wave of madness passes and it being stupid populist rubbish becomes clear so it gets killed before becoming law. It tempers the mob rule that is democracy into something more stable and sane. Seriously, watch BBC Parliament. It completely changed how I think of our political structure.