Search For One Hundred Peers

Jonathan Isaby has managed to excite certain people by asking which retiring Tory MPs should be given peerages. Isn't that just salon gossip? Yes. But it shouldn't be.

ConservativeHome has been running such a series for some months, seeking one hundred persons to be ennobled in its own party interest. As announced last month, however, this blog seeks one hundred men, of any party or none, to avail themselves of the People's Peer application process, the only means whereby a man can now hope to participate in the parliamentary process. There have already been a few expressions of interest, and of course it is early days.

As a thirtysomething old Durham hand, I am no stranger to the complaint, often well-founded, that "I'd have had a seat this time, or at least a very good chance of one, but they are only interested in women". But this legitimate grievance is by no means confined either to my own age group or to those who went to any university, never mind to one of the grander ones.

So, gentlemen, knowing yourselves to be at least as well-qualified as any of the unsuccessful shortlistees for the Labour nomination here at North West Durham, and knowing yourselves to be at least as well-qualified as the appropriately named Cash or someone who merely slept her way into the Tory nomination at South West Norfolk, and knowing that you actually want to be in the parliamentary process at all (unlike Pat Glass here, who puts out leaflets selling herself on the grounds of her lack of interest in politics, to which her lack of record fulsomely bears witness), how about making the transition from gentlemen to noblemen?

This way, you are not even seeking a salary, although I do think that there is a very strong case for sponsorship of Peers by that majority of trade unions which has never been affiliated to the Labour Party, by those which have lately disaffiliated, and even by those which remain affiliated, especially, though not exclusively, through things like the Unison General Political Fund. After all, where else is this money to be spent? The House of Commons?

Let us compile a list of one hundred men who would have been MPs this time but were prevented on grounds of sex, as well as grounds of daring to be interested in politics, before submitting it, with all accompanying documentation, to the House of Lords Appointments Commission as well as to the media.

That will certainly show up the very low calibre of at least the major party sections of the new Commons intake. For example, the responsible Conservative Party functionary last month emailed every candidate demanding that they confirm their residency in this country for tax purposes, as if that were anything other than a given; the House of Lords Appointments Commission already insists on it. By no means only the women are largely rubbish. Of such men as have been let through, let's just say that "he showed George Osborne his feminine side" and leave it at that.

As for the cry that you have to be an Independent to be a People's Peer, there are two answers to that. The first is that one person appointed as such is now a Government Whip, which in the Lords includes answering questions on behalf of Departments of State without a Minister in that House, so that we may reasonably assume him to have been a Labour Party member throughout his adult life and to have been ennobled on that understanding, though via the People's Peer provision and even sitting as a Cross Bencher until his later appointment. The other is that if you are still in a party that treats you like this, then more fool you.