[1] Of these, major recommendations included the following:[2] The Commission explicitly recommended against a wholly or predominantly elected chamber or selection of members by random selection, co-option, or indirect election from devolved institutions, local governments, or British members of the European Parliament (MEPs).
This could also threaten the traditional primacy of the House of Commons within the Westminster parliamentary system.
One commentator, the Liberal Democrat peer Lord McNally, wrote in January 2000: "Those who fear that a House of Lords with increased authority will challenge the status of the Commons and cause constitutional conflict - or "gridlock" as the Americans call it when the Senate and the House of Representatives disagree - will worry that the Wakeham proposals set us on just that course.
On the other hand, those who believe that the second chamber must have the full democratic mandate which only the ballot box can bestow will be disappointed.
"[4] Others were dissatisfied with the Wakeham Commission's refusal to remove appointed members; according to BBC political correspondent Nick Assinder, "opponents accused the commission of failing to come up with a single, simple recommendation and allowing the creation of chamber of "Tony's Cronies"".