WITH its woolsack, red leather benches and air of gentile stuffiness, the House of Lords is one of Britain's most exclusive clubs.

Visitors to the resplendent chamber can witness some of the realm's most distinguished heirs blustering angrily over the latest piece of legislation sent up by those troublesome MPs in the Commons, or perhaps having a quick after-lunch snooze in the corner.

Positioned next to the House of Commons, the Lords has more than 1,200 members, including representatives from the church, the legal system and some of Britain's oldest families.

It is an unelected body whose role is primarily to scrutinise and deliberate Government policy.

But Tony Blair's Government is determined to push forward with reform - its House of Lords Bill was receiving its final reading last night and that will see the vast majority of hereditary peers removed from the chamber when Parliament rises for its winter break.

The bill will end the centuries-old right of more than 700 hereditaries to sit and vote on Government legislation.

A rump of just 92 hereditaries will be able to remain temporarily until the Government carries out its next stage of reform, when they may be axed for good. The chamber's 26 arch bishops and bishops and about 500 life peers will also be allowed to stay.

The decision as to which 92 hereditaries can remain will be decided in two separate votes within the Lords.

The first, which will be held today and tomorrow, will decide 15 peers who will become deputy speakers and other office holders with the results published on Friday.

A further two posts, for the Earl Marshall and Lord Great Chamberlain, will be appointed by the Queen. The second election, set for November 3 and 4, will be for 75 hereditaries. For that number each of the house's parties has been given a quota to fill, proportionate to their current size within the Lords.

Those who are standing have 75 words in which they can make their case for staying.

The Earl of Limerick, 69, a chartered accountant who lives at West Hoathly, East Grinstead, is throwing his hat into the ring, albeit reluctantly.

He said: "I've put my name forward but with mixed feelings. It's an unsteady period and will probably not be a very happy period.

"The thing about the House of Lords was people were heard with courtesy and could express feelings which were different because they are experienced and know what they are talking about.

"But the current administration is hell-bent on controlling everything."

He believes a reformed second chamber should be markedly different from, and retain a certain independence from, the Commons if it is to be effective.

He said: "I don't think many would defend the outgoing hereditary peerage system but we shouldn't muck with the constitution when nobody has demonstrated that what will take its place will be superior.

"Whatever replaces it should be different from the House of Commons because otherwise there's the potential for conflict.

"What we require is a reasonable independence of judgement, like a senate in other countries, people who are a bit older and have expertise in other fields.

"The House of Lords does a very thorough job in reviewing legislation, especially European legislation, which the House of Commons simply isn't doing."

In his "mini-manifesto", Viscount Brentford, 66, of Wadhurst, has stressed his work in the Lords, which has included taking part in debates on international affairs, human rights, homelessness, children and young people.

He said: "I am standing for election, although I know the odds are against me winning.

"There are no proposals for reform, just proposals to abolish and nobody knows what will follow. But it was in the Labour party manifesto and it's perfectly legitimate to do this."

Viscount Brentford, who succeeded his father to the house in 1983, said he wished to continue in the Lords because of a sense of duty to the country.

He added: "It's a hard-working job without any pay. We basically see ourselves as public servants, we don't have the prestige of a member of the House of Commons but we do a great deal of dog work on revising legislation."

In his 75 word "manifesto" the Earl De La Warr, 51, of Withyham, admitted he had a poor attendance record but stressed this was because he had a full-time job in the city. He said retirement would give him more time to attend.

Also standing is Viscount Gage, 65, of Firle, near Lewes. He lists his interests as the countryside and agriculture.

Lord Steve Bassam was appointed a Labour life peer in August 1997 and will not be affected by the first round of reforms.

The former leader of Brighton and Hove Council said: "Abolishing the hereditary peers' rights to vote and sit in the House of Lords is a first step to modernising our legislature but we have to await the outcome of the all-party supported Royal Commission.

"The Lords has to be made more in touch with the democratic spirit of our time."

However, Lord Strathclyde, leader of the opposition peers, has launched an attack on the Government for its "cackhanded" reform and has urged it to drop the House of Lords Bill and wait for a Royal commission report on the future of the chamber, due out at the end of the year.

Converted for the new archive on 30 June 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.