For

The current House of Lords compliments the House of Commons as it has a different
composition

The expertise and experience in the House of Lords is essential for scrutiny

There is less party influence this is crucial for scrutiny

Against

It remains undemocratic and lacks legitimacy and accountability

Have a Unicameral system

A second chamber is not needed in unitary system and anyway it can only delay

A reformed House of Commons could be given more time for scrutiny

It works effectively in countries like Denmark, Sweden, New Zealand and Israel

Against

UK has too big a population for a unicameral system New Zealand has less than 10 million

Scrutiny needs to be carried out by a second chamber with less party control/influence and it
needs more time

There is little support for this option

All elected

Those that argue for a fully elected chamber point to the fact that this would be democratic
and therefore more accountable. It would act as more effective check on the Executive

Those who argue against it state that the new House of Lords might simply mirror the House
of Combat and therefore it would serve no purpose if a Government had a majority in both
houses it would have far too much power

For

Democratic Legitimacy

Wider Representation

Better Legislation

Checking the Commons

Ending Executive Tyranny

Against

Specialist Knowledge

Gridlocked Government
Complementary chambers

Dangers of Partisanship

Less Decisive government