Don't empty the Lords of its scientists In the past year the Lords debated the Health and Social Care Bill. One of the successful amendments to it was a new requirement that the Secretary of State must promote research in the NHS. The campaign for the change was led by Lord Phil Willis, who is also chair of the Association of Medical Research Charities. He noted that the new requirement would make the NHS "the only research-led health service in the world." There are many other examples of how well-informed peers amend public policy for the better. Without the input of experts, it is arguable that we wouldn't have achieved these vital changes. Yet there are also obvious problems with the status quo. As Lord Martin Rees himself observed, "we are all depressingly "lay" outside our specialisms." Our Astronomer Royal doesn't turn up to debate astrophysics when he turns up to Parliament, and Lord Winston's interventions on his own specialist field of reproductive medicine are the exception rather than the rule. Without naming names, one suspects many of the other "expert" peers rarely turn up at all. A chamber full of Nobel laureates is therefore not sensible, let alone possible. Yet we can still ask whether reform risks throwing out the baby with the bathwater. Experts - be they from the sciences, engineering, humanities, or any other area of public life - bring a style of thinking and a personal network that have been developed over time. These assets simply wouldn't be there in a chamber only filled by people who had the money, time, and inclination to stand for election. One option is to make sure that around one third of the Lords are appointed by a statutory, independent, appointments commission. As well as supplying expertise, this would also almost ensure no party ever had a majority in the chamber, preventing debates from being politically steamrollered. Another is to improve the structures, instead of the composition, of the Lords. For instance, those in favour of a wholly elected upper house argue that we could beef up the committee system, so that more external experts are on-call to inform and guide scrutiny of government. Sadly we're currently heading in the opposite direction - there are proposals to cut the resources to the Lords" Science and Technology committee so that it can only undertake one inquiry at a time. The Campaign for Science and Engineering is today publishing a short report which examines these issues and proposes some fixes. We really would like our Parliament to stand on the shoulders of giants, in the words of Sir Isaac Newton - but our aim is also to ask you to consider what the Lords should be for. The debate is too important to be left to politicians alone. Imran Khan is director of the Campaign for Science and Engineering