SIR – Further to David Hornby’s comments regarding the recent appointments to the House of Lords, it would be better if future selections to the House were undertaken by an independent body, whose decisions were free from party politics.

There are those who argue that the Lords should be an elected chamber, as it would give it a supposed legitimacy when examining government legislation.

But for this to occur, elections would have to be fought and inevitably on a party political basis.

In this way, the Lords would merely resemble the Commons and lose any vestige of independence which it may have previously held.

The old system of hereditary peerage was scorned by egalitarians, but had the virtue that despite its limitations, those sitting in the Lords were potentially better able to act objectively.

Hereditary peers, although invariably conservative by nature, were free from the need to fight elections and could therefore assess policies on their respective merits, and not merely to further the interests of party politics.

The abolition of hereditary peers has given way to political appointments, which serves more vested interests than the common good.

Alec Suchi, Allerton Road, Bradford