It is astonishing that until yesterday Parliament had had no debate on the current economic crisis. The House of Commons has failed in its duty to be the country's debating chamber. Instead, yesterday, it fell to the House of Lords to take up the cudgels. Their Lordships had a six hour debate and I highly recommend it to you to read - HERE.
The participants read like a list of Who Was Who in British Politics, but that is no bad thing. We heard from Lords/Ladies Lawson, Haskel, Howe, Shephard, Powell, Lamont, Forsyth, Taverne, Peston, MacGregor, Skidelsky, Burns, Barnett, Higgins, Ryder and Tugendhat among many others. Think how many years at the Treasury many of them have served together and you will see why this is a debate well worth reading.
What a shame it is that the House of Commons could barely compete with that line-up. Perhaps that's why it has shied away from an economic debate.
22 comments:
at least we, the great unwashed (ie voters)can still rely on the unelected, undemocratic house of lords to defend us from the contemptious bullying of the 'political elite'that make up the house of commons
I've being saying for weeks that it's disgusting that 2 men have made all the decisions during the financial crisis.
The US and Germany have had debates, so what happened to ours?
But then again, Cameron has backed everything that Brown has done, so what would be the point?
Hazel Blears..
"Well I ride a motorbike and tap dance, which I think is perfectly normal."
If she can tap dance while riding a motor-bike, she should be in a circus.. - lovely interview from a great girl - what IS she doing in a 'New Labour' Party..
I do hope that the excellence of their Lordships' debate makes those who support an elected Upper House seriously rethink their position.
Is it to be supposed that such a debate could have been held in a House that was elected?
What would happen if you played "Yesterday in Parliament" to a martian? He'd hear reasoned, measured, informed debate from one place and a baying, howling and yapping from the other. If you then told him which of the two we all think needs to be reformed, he'd probably have to report that earth isn't worth invading, because we're all insane!
Dave missed a superb opportunity.
He could have rented a hall in London and held hearings about what had happened to the economy - just asked the main players to come in and explain open-endedly.
I despair of the Conservative party.
When are they going to start being an opposition?
The problem is that they are emotionally in bed with the government, and sleep-walking.
Like Lewis Hamilton, if you don't go out there and aggressively try to win, you risk losing everything in a nail-biter.
Cameron; you have been warned.
Tony
How bizarre that most of them work , or worked, for Lord Rothschild. And those that don't sit on glorified quangoes with him. The associations these men have with banks makes them robbers. They've colluded with others in the theft of our money and now they have the cheek to pretend its nothing to do with them.
As a civil servant I was surprised by the quality of much of the work of the Lords. There were backwoods peers with little to contribute and minor ex-MPs attending for the daily allowance - but in combined experience and expertise they were head and shoulders above the Commons and not hobbled by ambition or blinkered by their party labels.
In things where I came across them, mainly the work of their slect committees, eg vetting European Community legislation and Science and Technology policy they were so much better than the Commons - and I still remember reading the Lords Hansard of a debate (in the 70s?)where three of the speakers held Nobel Prizes!
An appointed house based on experience and merit and the representation of a broad range of interests seems to me to be a lot more likely to be a sensible constitutional watchdog than an elected one which would be a sort of second hand commons as much under the thumbs of the whips as the present one.
No debates? Are you sure Iain? They've been short admittedly. Lab: Announcement; Con: Me Too; Lib Dem: Me Too. Then off to TV studios to brief against whatever it is.
Lack of debate in the commons is typical of the dictatorial way new labour govern.
And as for the notion of 'Dave' going round hiring halls for a debate - yes fine all very well, but all that would do is force Dave to point out in all honesty that the only real short to medium term future for us is economic misery and that he as PM will have to make it worse to get out of this mess.
Meantime Brown would be swanning round saying "don't worry just a bit of JMK and more borrowing and some very special spending for all our marginal seats, 'trust me I know what I am doing' "
Not sure its good politics to go out of your way telling people that you are going to make life more miserable than your opponents.
Robert Peston's been given a peerage? That explains a lot!!!
For all the rhetoric about the usefulness of the House of Lords, I think that they are doing a fine job of safeguarding the public from reactionary, ill thought out legislation. And putting the Government on notice, that there inefficiencies aren't sliding, unnoticed, under the carpet. As a bleeding heart left winger, I couldn't really give a damn about who is associated with who at this point, I just want someone to start demanding that the hard questions are answered with some degree of transparency and with a view to accountability.
trevorsden said...
...Not sure its good politics to go out of your way telling people that you are going to make life more miserable than your opponents.
November 04, 2008 11:39 AM
To my mind, that sums the whole problem with politics today.
If you watch Andrew Neil's interview with David Owen over the weekend (BBC News 24), Owen said exactly the opposite. And he's dead right.
Most people simply want the truth and they will follow LEADERSHIP. It's what Thatcher provided for all het faults.
She came into power in 79 and MADE a recession - increased interest rates when everyone was saying they should be dropped. But by LEADING she took the country with her albeit a war in the Falklands helped!
Politicians are more despised now than ever becasue NO ONE believes a bloody word they spout - and Britain is the poorer for it.
With a handful of honourable exceptions (eg the UKIP peers) the Lords support the EU and all its works, and therefore are doing great harm to this country.
Many of them have worked for the EU at some time so are in receipt an EU pension, which they don't have to declare in the register of members' interests, and which is explicitly conditional on continued loyalty to the EU.
Niccolo Machiavelli said...
Robert Peston's been given a peerage? That explains a lot!!!
It's daddie, isn't it?
Iain knows very well who is responsible for the daily order of business in the Commons, and it would be helpful if he would actually say so.
The Treasury Select Committee hearing yesterday does seem to have escaped his attention.
Trevorsden.
The point about hiring a hall and holding hearings (note the alliteration) would have been to achieve three things;
1. upstage Broon
2. give Cameron the centre of the stage because all of the Kommentariat would have been there trying to find out what the bloody hell is happening - because noone knows, not even Robert Peston
3. given Cameron some ideas for his cunning plan which everyone knows doesn't exist - yet, and by god he needs one, and he needs one fast.
Tony
British account holders deposited money into British banks on the assumption that the banks were run by decent, honest, honourable men and women who would look after it and ensure depositers received a return on their money until depositers decided to withdraw it. But the banks were and are run by thieves who stole the money. Its no good hiding behind weasel words and calling it "a global crisis" or a "credit crunch" or a "problem with subprime". Its theft. Its a crime. Its fraud. Gordon Brown is an accessory to a fraud. Why has no-one been arrested? Why haven't bankers' assets been frozen? Who is going to deliver justice to the victims of this gigantic crime?
Pompous members of the House of Lords, most of whom sit on the boards of banks, can hold forth and pontificate all they like but it doesn't alter the fact that they are crooks and they should be held to account.
Not sure what Peston Sr would have added to the debate. He was on the Beeb the other day saying, effectively, 'Crisis? What crisis?'
Tony Anonymous (a Greek gentleman, no doubt): absolutely agree, in spirit! The Tories have to do SOMETHING to win the next election - just sitting around waiting for Broon to lose it is idiotic, esp now that he's got the evil Campbell and vile (= evil anag?) Mandy on board. Those two are past masters at lying their way to plausibility.
Word ver the best yet - nulabio (honest!)
I was agreeing with you, Iain, until I started looking a bit closer at your list of economic 'giants'. Lawson? Caused terrible early 90s recession. Howe? Caused catastrophic early 80s recession through his disastrous monetarist experiment. Lamont? Perhaps the least able and successful Chancellor of the 20th century. Hmmm. Just because people have been around for a while, doesn't mean they know what they're talking about. The way some people talk up John Redwood's credentials is another case in point - he proved himself to be a second-rate minister in the Major administration, not to mention a disloyal snake in the grass.
A six-hour debate? To what end? Their hot air helps no-one and serves no purpose other than to puff up their already-inflated egos. Many of them have links with the greedy banks who caused all this as well, so they are hypocrites to boot!
Iain,
You're either woefully misinformed or attempting a bare-faced lie of Brown proportions.
There have been at least 3 debates since the summer on the economy. For example on 9th October, plus debates following statements from the Chancellor, and other such discussions in the chamber.
By all means highlight a good debate in the Lords, but don't do down the green benches just because you failed to get your arse on one of them.
Post a Comment