For a change in the peer-reveiwing as an urgent need?

With an increasing number of Journal and other publication, the review by peer started to be difficult and very often nonqualified reviewers are solicited. Very often now the Journal send us a list that ressemble the directory a.  This is a problem since many of the persons listed here do not have even a record over 10 and there are supposed to review works they don't know, and they are not qualified. I would like to start a huge discussion that can be sent to the main Journal to change the rules. For example, a research paper submitted by a researcher that is quite well evaluated could not be challenged by someone that is not at the same level or higher. 
Some review that needed urgent review < 5 open days should be paid correctly, but only if the work of the reviewer is well done. This is easy to evaluate since the data are actually available and a bad reviewer could be excluded.
Sincerely yours