Why doesn’t the house of lords need further reform?

1911: After Lords rejected Liberal’s ‘People’s Budget’ in 1909. Could only delay for 2 years and couldn’t delay money bills.
1949: could delay for one year – the Commons can use the 1949 PA to force the bill through – allows the Lords to delay a bill by 1 year – used rarely: a recent example was the Hunting Act (2004).
The Salisbury Convention states that the HofL should not reject bills that are in the manifesto of the governing party.
HofL Act (1999) removed all but 92 hereditary peers. Before the Act came into force, the HofL contained more than 750 hereditary peers who had inherited their title.
2014: allowed Peers to resign/retire. Can also be removed for committing criminal offence or for lack of attendance.
As of Feb 2020, 105 resigned and 6 removed for non-attendance.

If an elected House of Lords considered itself to have a mandate of its own this could lead to gridlock, where bills struggle to succeed, and little progress is made because the two houses simply cannot agree.
This can be seen in the US legislative branch of Congress, where the House of Representatives and the Senate must agree on legislation for it to pass.
The 2012-13 session of Congress was the least productive in history, largely because the Republican Party held a majority in the House of Representatives, while the Democratic Party held a majority in the Senate.
The House of Lords’ power to delay should also not be underestimated.
The Lords defeated the European Union (Referendum) Bill in January 2014 by filibustering it, dragging out debate with amendments so that it ran out of time to complete its committee stage before the end of the parliamentary year.
The University College London’s Constitution Unit examined 406 government defeats in the Lords between 1999-2012 and found that the government ultimately accepted 44% of them.

Peers have already become more defiant, and more willing to break with unwritten conventions.
Since the 1999 reforms, the House of Lords has become much more assertive.
The Lords’ decision to add two amendments to the European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Bill in March 2017 surprised many, given the result of the 2016 EU referendum, and the fact that all proposed amendments had been defeated in the House of Commons.
Peers have also proven willing to break with longstanding conventions in order to challenge the government.
In October 2015, the House of Lords voted to delay the Tax Credits Regulations, a statutory instrument reforming current tax credits rules that had already passed in the House of Commons.
This was controversial, because there is a longstanding convention that the House of Lords only rejects secondary legislations in exceptional circumstances.
The House of Lords has only blocked SIs four times since 1999.
The Lords arguably also broke with the Salisbury Convention, as the Conservatives had pledged to cut £12 million from the welfare budget prior to the 2015 election.