Do we need new peers in the House of Lords?

THE House of Lords is a vital part of the constitutional workings of our country, but even its members acknowledge there are far too many peers and reform is desperately needed. So why has the Prime Minister appointed 16 new peers, bringing his total to 52 in just one year? There will be 200 more members of the House of Lords than the elected House of Commons. It smacks of cronyism when Boris Johnson ignores official advice so we can reward leading Brexiteers.

M. SPRINGER, Reading, Berks. THE nomination of a peerage to Tory donor Peter Cruddas by the Prime Minister exemplifies the huge failings in our political system. I am sure it is a mere coincidence that Mr Cruddas has donated £3.3 million to the Conservatives, including £658,000 since Mr Johnson became prime minister. He resigned as Tory co-treasurer in 2012 after he offered undercover reporters access to then prime minister David Cameron in exchange for a £250,000 donation. There are now 830 unelected lawmakers lounging on the red benches, despite a Lords committee recommending this number be capped at 600. Many are flunkies and cronies who pick up their £300 a day in expenses for doing very little. They are members of what is in essence a publicly funded private club. Lawmakers should be elected and not be appointed through the patronage of a prime minister or by accident of birth.

ALEX ORR, Edinburgh. IT’S time for plaudits to be handed to the people who have helped rid the nation of the EU. Nigel Farage has spent more than 30 years fighting to make us an independent country. It is churlish of Boris Johnson to omit him from his New Year honours list. Mr Farage should be elevated to the House of Lords where he could continue fighting this nation’s corner.

N. WOODS, Chilton, Co. Durham. BORIS, you’ve named 16 new peers, but you forgot me.

BRIAN BEST, High Wycombe, Bucks.