The one thing they should not be was party hacks: they would all take their seats on the cross benches in the Lords, with a sizeable body of other non party-political peers.

Applications rolled in from more than 3,000 people across the UK, from lollipop ladies to lawyers and journalists.

But the first batch of 15 new cross-benchers, announced in April 2001, were criticised for being drawn from the ranks of the great and the good who already dominate the Honours List.

To make matters worse, the man in charge of the selection process, Lord Stevenson caused further offence, by implying that ordinary people, such as hairdressers, would not feel comfortable in the House of Lords.

The House of Lords Appointments Commission is still accepting nominations. Lord Stevenson, hasn't ruled out the possibility that a headmaster may yet make it into the Lords.

So, what went wrong?

The germ of the People's Peers idea came from a left wing think-tank. It produced a policy paper arguing for a return to the Ancient Greek origins of democracy, in which citizens were chosen to govern completely at random.

But, it seems the culture of the Lords was far more resilient than the government had reckoned with. Far from being a random choice, the People's Peers' were heavily vetted.

Steeped in the establishment culture himself, Lord Stevenson had a very clear idea of who would fit the bill - and what their CV should look like.