If you haven't already noticed, I take a pretty dim view of the way members of the House of Lords are selected (click on labels for 'House of Lords' postings below for more detail), not to mention the way undemocratically selected bishops and arch-bishops have the cheek to lecture the public on democracy.
A quick survey of published details about the the 23 bishops who attended the House of Lords in the year ending March 2008 shows that they put in an average of 22.4 days each.
The keenest five were the bishops of Southwark (83), Chester (46), Manchester (45) Southwell (44) and Liverpool (38).
The lowest attendances were clocked up by the bishops of Chichester (3), Truro (5), Canterbury, Arch-bishop (7) Carlisle (9) and Durham (9).
Top of the claims for daily expenses was the Bishop of Truro, with £1,124 for each of his five days in the Lords, while joint equal lowest spenders were the Arch-bishops of Canterbury (£0) and York (£0) .
As for what any of this means, I have no more idea than I have about what democratic principle entitles any of them to sit in the so-called 'upper' house of our parliament.
Climbing out of the manure?
At today's annual village fun day and church fete, there was a brief sighting of our local MP, David Heathcote-Amory - he of the expenses claim for horse manure and other 'gardening' expenses fame.
One interesting fact is that it was the first time he's ever put in an appearance in the fifteen years that I've been involved in the event, and one can't help wondering whether he was hoping it might help him to climb out of the manure.
Another interesting fact was that he didn't buy any tea or cakes and wasn't seen spending any money at other stalls either. I know this because my wife was in charge of taking the money for tea and cakes and was all set to ask him if he'd like a receipt.
Unfortunately, the matter never arose and we were left wondering whether he'd have managed to spend a bit more if he'd been confident of being able to claim it back from the taxpayer.
We also wonder how many other local events this weekend have suffered similar financial losses in the wake of the MPs' expenses revelations.
One interesting fact is that it was the first time he's ever put in an appearance in the fifteen years that I've been involved in the event, and one can't help wondering whether he was hoping it might help him to climb out of the manure.
Another interesting fact was that he didn't buy any tea or cakes and wasn't seen spending any money at other stalls either. I know this because my wife was in charge of taking the money for tea and cakes and was all set to ask him if he'd like a receipt.
Unfortunately, the matter never arose and we were left wondering whether he'd have managed to spend a bit more if he'd been confident of being able to claim it back from the taxpayer.
We also wonder how many other local events this weekend have suffered similar financial losses in the wake of the MPs' expenses revelations.
Since when were Archbishops experts on democracy?
Given some of his bizarre statements in the not too distant past (e.g. on Sharia Law), it doesn't really surprise me that the Archbishop of Canterbury now seems to think it part of his remit to pontificate about the potential damage that might be done to our democracy by the MPs' expenses revelations.
Given the mysterious (and completely undemocratic) way in which bishops and other senior clergy are appointed, Dr Williams has quite a nerve if he thinks that anyone should take his views on democracy seriously - at least until he shows some sign of putting his own house in order first.
Given the mysterious (and completely undemocratic) way in which bishops and other senior clergy are appointed, Dr Williams has quite a nerve if he thinks that anyone should take his views on democracy seriously - at least until he shows some sign of putting his own house in order first.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)