BRITAIN'S upper parliamentary chamber, the House of Lords, has been in the headlines for all the wrong reasons recently. On July 26th the Sun on Sunday, a right-wing tabloid, published pictures and footage of Lord Sewel, its deputy speaker and a former ally of Tony Blair, gadding about with prostitutes, snorting a white powder and complaining that his expenses were too measly. On July 28th, after two days of sustained media pressure, he resigned from the House of Lords under a new mechanism only instituted last year. The scandal broke at a time when the chamber's role and purpose is under renewed scrutiny. It already has more members than any legislature but the Chinese People's Congress, none of them elected, and is about to receive a new batch of appointees. So what is the House of Lords for? The bicameral system under which Britain is governed today dates back to the 14th century, when knights representing shires and boroughs (the Commons) began to meet separately from religious leaders and nobles (the Lords). The Lords was initially the mightier of the two houses, but by the 17th century, and in the aftermath of Britain's 11-year period without a monarchy, the Commons' pre-eminence was formalised. Over the centuries the Lords evolved into a body made up of senior members of the clergy, political appointees and aristocrats who had inherited their places there, as a check on the legislative decisions taken by the more powerful lower house. It lost most of its veto powers in the first half of the 20th century, and in 1999 saw the expulsion of all but 92 of the hereditary peers.

The House of Lords is aged, overcrowded and increasingly ineffective Today the House of Lords, now dominated by political appointees, spends about half of its time scrutinising legislation passed up from the Commons, where most laws start their legislative journey. Under the "Salisbury Convention", the upper house does not block legislation for which parties have won a mandate at the polls (that is, proposals listed in their manifestos). But it does propose amendments and can impede progress on non-financial bills. Lords also ask questions of the government and sit on committees. Rather than receive a salary, each of the over 800 members is paid a £300 ($468) allowance for each day he or she attends.

Thus the Lords does several valuable jobs: providing a calmer, more reflective forum than the rowdy Commons; scrutinising policy with a long-term view, rather than the electorally focused perspective of MPs; acting as a store of wisdom and experience acquired in ministerial office and other areas of public life. Nonetheless, many (including this newspaper) have argued that the Lords has to change. Common complaints are that it can be sleepy (the average age of members is 70), enables politicians to reward their cronies and is not representative of the country at large. Some would turn it into an elected Senate, with representatives of all the regions and nations of the United Kingdom. During the last parliament Liberal Democrats in the coalition government tried to move the house in that direction, but were blocked by Conservative backbenchers. With the Tories now governing alone there is little political appetite for an overhaul of the upper house—despite Lord Sewel's efforts.