As a result of prompt action by the new chief executive of the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority

As a result of prompt action by the new chief executive of the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority, Dr Ken Boston, the exam boards will know the standards to which they are marking. His curbs on their chief executives’ powers to increase the grade boundaries against the wishes of senior examiners will avoid any pressure to mark down next year’s scripts. However, it remains to be seen whether the QCA will be able to recruit enough examiners to ensure that scripts are marked on time next year. In this respect, it would be good if agreement could be reached on Mr Tomlinson’s suggestion that the publication of the results be put back two weeks to allow more time.As to whether the Tomlinson report amounts to an admission that the introduction of the Curriculum 2000 reforms was a mistake, it has to be said that, if the ideal is to create two separate qualifications out of A- and AS-levels, it would be best not to start from here. However, the AS-level has brought a broadening of the sixth-form curriculum for many students and a further qualification for others who might have struggled to obtain an A-level pass That is welcome.. Soon, probably in January, Parliament will make a decision about the future of the House of Lords. Over 300 MPs have already signed a House of Commons motion in favour of a wholly or largely elected House of Lords.

Yet arguments against electing all or a substantial number of the members of a reformed second chamber continue to be put and debated. First, that an elected Upper House will automatically seek to increase its powers to the detriment of the Lower House and thereby cause legislative and political gridlock. Second, elections will mean fewer independents and more party hacks. Third, disenchantment with the political process is currently so great that the electorate will simply spurn the opportunity to turn out and vote.The first argument is simply not borne out by the evidence from second chambers in democracies elsewhere in the world. Over half of second chambers overseas are directly elected and they are not gridlocked Neither are they demanding or gaining new powers.

On the contrary, they live with the powers they have been given.In the case of the United States, however, the situation is very different The US is a presidential rather than a parliamentary system. It is based on the principle of the separation of powers between legislature and executive. Crucially, the two arms of the legislature – Senate and House of Representatives – have been given co-powers by the Constitution. This stands in stark contrast to the scrutinising, revising and delaying role of the House of Lords and other second chambers in parliamentary systems. Indeed, in the US it is the Upper House – the Senate – that has the greater strength and influence.Looking round the world, there is no straightforward correlation between direct election of the second chamber and its willingness to challenge the primary chamber. Indeed some unelected second chambers are as capable of opposing the primary chamber as elected ones. The Canadian Senate, for example, which has a bizarre non-elective method of choosing its members, has challenged and blocked legislation on occasions.