Save Us From The Immortally Banal Words Of Clegg
Jerry Hayes couldn't give a monkey's about Nick Clegg and his House of Lords reform.
22 Dec 2011, 09:00
In need of reform?
Every now and again a senior politician says something of such hoggwhimperingly, sphincter rattlinglly, gonad clenchingly, haemorrhoid inducingly banality that I want to grab a shotgun, run out into the streets shouting “noooooooo”. And then shoot Jeremy Clarkson in front of his family.
Yesterday was one such day. For there, leering at me from every newspaper, were the immortally crass words of our deputy Prime Minister, “The Lords is a standing affront to everything a liberal democracy should be.” Surely he wasn’t referring to the only chamber that bothers to scrutinise some of the ill thought out gibberish that is served up in the Commons? Or was he referring to those who cannot be bribed or threatened by a political whipping system and can actually speak their mind and vote against the government who appointed them?
Poor old Cleggy seems to think that pushing forward the reform of the House of Lords is going to be something that will be the talk of the pubs and the clubs and show the Lib Dems to be, “different.” The truth of the matter that there is no agreement on the matter and it will result in wasted months of wrangling which will make the government look foolish and distracted from the issues that really do matter to people.
So what is this Blairite obsession with fixing things that aren’t broken? We had a perfectly workable set of Law Lords who administered justice fairly and impartially and cost about £500,000 a year to run. But oh no, it looked appalling to Johnny Foreigner that there wasn’t a separation between the executive and the judiciary and so we now have the Supreme Court where the same people are doing the same thing with running costs of about £30 million a year. Utterly bonkers.
In theory the House of Lords is in need of reform. People who make our laws should be elected, say some. Fair point. But this House has very limited law making functions. They are not on equal terms with the Commons, who because of their elected legitimacy, has supremacy. Elect them and they would rightly demand equality. And equality will mean they will be just another part of the political patronage treadmill. It will be just another greasy pole for party timeservers, greasers, chancers and intolerably ambitious little SPADS. In other words, just like the Commons.
And forget about proper scrutiny in Standing Committees. It will go the way of the Commons where the Whips tell government backbenchers to remain silent so that the Opposition can be seen to be talking for so long that it justifies a guillotine motion at report stage.
Politically it will not be good for Clegg and his party. They will be seen as relevant and up to date as the Tory Euro carpet biters and vaginal deodorant. What is a standing affront to a liberal democracy is that 22% of the population are functionally illiterate, that too many children are living in poverty,that drugs gangs swagger for control of our inner city streets. Sort out decent care and dignity for the old and the sick, affordable housing and jobs, then, Cleggy old son, think about the reform of the Lords.
Now where is that Clarkson fellow?
The author
Jerry Hayes
Jerry Hayes is a former Conservative MP and leading barrister defending and prosecuting high profile cases
Full profile →
Comments (1)
Subscribe to this posts's comments feed
If we elect the second chamber who will fill it? Presumably second rate politicians who couldn't get seats in the Commons. The quality of the "first" rate MPs we have already is hardly sparkling, without electing some even more useless people!
28/12/2011 10:45