Lords Reform

A recent commenter on my blog wanted to know what I think about Lords Reform.

I've made my views very clear in the past, but just to make my position extra clear I'll repeat myself. I don't believe that any one who has not been elected by the people should be involved in passing the laws we live under. So I am in favour of a 100% elected Upper House, starting now.

• No "if"s, no "but"s.
• No "phasing out" of hereditaries or life peers.
• No Bishops or other faith group reps.
• No appointed "experts".
• No prime ministerial patronage.
• No Lord Levy.
• No Lord Falconer.
• No Lord Sainsbury.
• No Lord Goldsmith.
• No Lord Townsley.
• No Lord Garrard.
• No Lord Noon.
• No Lord Patel.
• No large donations or loans.
• No money in the bank.
• No protection from bankruptcy.
• No Labour Party.
• Oh, no!

Right - Lords Reform.

What I would do first and foremost is to get parliament to enact a bill to greatly reduce the powers of the freehold owning body, Middlesex County Cricket Club. At the same time we would substantially increase the statutory powers of the England and Wales Cricket Board.

This would allow the national test, one-day and 20/20 sides to have much greater access to decent training facilities at the ground and reduce the dependence of our national teams on the green in Parliament Square for their training sessions.

This could only help to improve our dismal performance against Australia in the Ashes and the one-day test series and...