Readers of earlier posts on the House of Lords will know that I’d been hoping that the story about alleged dodgy dealings by some peers might revive the debate about the absurdly undemocratic way in which members of our second chamber are selected.
As it hasn’t done so, maybe the furore about parliamentary ‘expenses’ will redirect attention along the corridor to the House of Cronies again, as the way ‘expenses’ are dished out there seems to be no less virtuous than it is in the House of Commons
The only plus side of the apparently lenient six-month suspension just handed out to Lords Truscott and Taylor is that it will at least save the taxpayer about £50,000 (as their combined allowances claim for last year came to over £100,000).
But there are still plenty of other noble noses in the trough, with questions already being asked about where the likes of Lord’s Lawson, Razzall and Rennard really do have their first and second homes. Meanwhile, I’ve just checked on the claims made by various other Lords I’ve heard of and was amazed to discover that their tax-free ‘allowances’ ranged from £25,000 to £60,000+ a year.
As I don’t have access to the manpower that the Daily Telegraph has been able to devote to exposing MP’s expenses, I now invite readers to do some research into Lords’ expenses for themselves – and, if they feel so inclined, to report back with any interesting findings.
It’s easy enough to check on who’s been claiming what because the full list for the year ending March 2008 is published and can be inspected HERE.
What a fine Speaker!
Mr Speaker Martin’s stumbling performance as he read his statement out to the House of Commons yesterday prompted me to dig through some clips of a previous Speaker in action.
In this gem, Betty Boothroyd interrupts the then prime minister, John Major, to put a heckler firmly in his place. Admittedly, she wasn’t reading a pre-prepared script, but the clarity and decisiveness of her intervention are nice reminders of what a very fine Speaker she was:
In this gem, Betty Boothroyd interrupts the then prime minister, John Major, to put a heckler firmly in his place. Admittedly, she wasn’t reading a pre-prepared script, but the clarity and decisiveness of her intervention are nice reminders of what a very fine Speaker she was:
What a poor speaker!
Watching the Speaker's statement to the House of Commons earlier this afternoon, I was struck by how ironic it is that someone with the title of 'Speaker' isn't very good at public speaking.
I thought about posting some tips on how he might do better. But, as anyone can do this for themselves by looking HERE (and as it looks as though he's not going to be around for much longer) I decided it would be a waste of time.
Sky Sports swindle
As the only sport I ever watch on television is test match cricket, I had no choice a few years ago but to start paying Sky's very high monthly charge for Sky Sports 1.
This weekend, for the umpteenth time, my attempts to see the current test match were thwarted by the fact that it is only being broadcast on Sky Sports 2 - and, for the privilege of watching it, they're trying to get me to pay even more than I'm already paying.
If Sky is allowed to outbid the BBC and Channel 4 for the television rights to test match cricket, they could at least have the decency to put it out on Sky Sports 1.
As they do not, I've decided to cancel my subscription and make do with BBC radio's ball-by-ball coverage and/or the BBC internet test match service.
The good news is that I've saved myself £15.17 per month, and I'd strongly recommend other dissatisfied customers to do likewise.
P.S. Three years later: If Sky Sports subscriptions haven't gone up during this time (which they almost certainly will have done), this excellent decision has now saved me at least £546.12.
And, in the meantime, I've discovered various sites on the internet where you can watch Sky Sports cricket coverage for £0.00.
This weekend, for the umpteenth time, my attempts to see the current test match were thwarted by the fact that it is only being broadcast on Sky Sports 2 - and, for the privilege of watching it, they're trying to get me to pay even more than I'm already paying.
If Sky is allowed to outbid the BBC and Channel 4 for the television rights to test match cricket, they could at least have the decency to put it out on Sky Sports 1.
As they do not, I've decided to cancel my subscription and make do with BBC radio's ball-by-ball coverage and/or the BBC internet test match service.
The good news is that I've saved myself £15.17 per month, and I'd strongly recommend other dissatisfied customers to do likewise.
P.S. Three years later: If Sky Sports subscriptions haven't gone up during this time (which they almost certainly will have done), this excellent decision has now saved me at least £546.12.
And, in the meantime, I've discovered various sites on the internet where you can watch Sky Sports cricket coverage for £0.00.
Is the MPs' expenses scandal a hidden legacy of Thatcherism?
In last Thursday's Question Time on BBC1, Margaret Beckett claimed that the existing system of parliamentary expenses was brought in under the Thatcher government in 1983, after a recommendations on a salary increase for MPs by an independent body had been deferred and staggered for 8 years – at which point the additional allowances were brought in ‘in stead of the pay increase’ (see below).
If this is true, it suggests that MPs were explicitly encouraged to subscribe to the culture of greed that Thatcherism is so often accused of having fermented during the 1980s, and it will be interested to wee whether this is confirmed in any forthcoming investigations of the system.
If this is true, it suggests that MPs were explicitly encouraged to subscribe to the culture of greed that Thatcherism is so often accused of having fermented during the 1980s, and it will be interested to wee whether this is confirmed in any forthcoming investigations of the system.
Rhetoric wins applause for questioners on BBC Question Time
It wasn't just some of David Dimbleby's questions that got applauded on last night's Question Time (see previous post). Some of the questions also won bursts of applause, which was hardly surprising in the case of those who used the rhetorical techniques that are most likely to trigger a positive audience response.
In this first example, the question includes a contrast between ‘their own money’ and ‘our country’ that triggers a burst of applause before Dimbleby or anyone else has time to say anything:
The speaker in this next one deploys three rhetorical techniques in quick succession: a rhetorical question, a three-part list and a contrast.
And, as so often happens when someone combines more than one technique at a time, the applause here exceeds the standard 8 pus or minus 1 second 'normal' burst of applause (by about 2 seconds), thereby underlining the response as a more enthusiastic one than usual:
It was quite explicit. It has to be wholly necessary to do the job as an MP.
[Q] What could be more plainer than that?
[1] They don’t need scatter cushions,
[2] bottles of gin,
[3] plocks.
[A] It’s not the system that’s wrong.
[B] It’s the people - the MPs themselves. [APPLAUSE]
For more about rhetorical techniques and how to use them to get your own messages across, see any of my books (listed in the left-hand margin).
In this first example, the question includes a contrast between ‘their own money’ and ‘our country’ that triggers a burst of applause before Dimbleby or anyone else has time to say anything:
The speaker in this next one deploys three rhetorical techniques in quick succession: a rhetorical question, a three-part list and a contrast.
And, as so often happens when someone combines more than one technique at a time, the applause here exceeds the standard 8 pus or minus 1 second 'normal' burst of applause (by about 2 seconds), thereby underlining the response as a more enthusiastic one than usual:
It was quite explicit. It has to be wholly necessary to do the job as an MP.
[Q] What could be more plainer than that?
[1] They don’t need scatter cushions,
[2] bottles of gin,
[3] plocks.
[A] It’s not the system that’s wrong.
[B] It’s the people - the MPs themselves. [APPLAUSE]
For more about rhetorical techniques and how to use them to get your own messages across, see any of my books (listed in the left-hand margin).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)