But the Lords isn't responsible for fixing itself - the government is fixing it against some gentle objections - and the Lords itself is independent of the Comm

But the Lords isn't responsible for fixing itself - the government is fixing it against some gentle objections - and the Lords itself is independent of the Commons whose legislation it scrutinizes. The more obvious "cash for peerage" cases have resulted in peers that wanted the title, but don't ever actually contribute to debates or appear in the chamber. As Lords have to sign in to get paid, if there are people who paid a huge amount of money to get the title who then don't get paid, well, I'm not sure it's an urgent problem of corruption. Of the group who are signing it but that perhaps shouldn't (very elderly, peers who sign in to get paid and then bugger off, and so on), there are explicit reforms coming to change that behaviour. Let me ask you though, what would you prefer? What do you think the upper chamber should look like? The Billy Bragg system where a single vote is FPTP for the lower chamber and proportional for the upper chamber? Something else?