Four Labor Party members of Britain’s House of Lords are under investigation after reporters for the Sunday Times newspaper, posing as lobbyists, taped conversations about exchanging money for legislative amendments. The scandal, dubbed “Erminegate” because of the lords’ fur-trimmed red robes, sparked calls for tougher ethics rules. (The Washington Post)
What the commentators said
The Lords aren’t noble any more, said Vernon Bogdanor in Britain’s The Times. But that’s not news—a 1999 law removed almost all of the hereditary members of the un-elected upper house of Parliament. Now, though, it will take some ethics reform with teeth to restore the public’s trust.
It will take more than that, said The Independent in an editorial. At least some members should be “democratically accountable to the electorate,” although switching to a wholly elected chamber would be a mistake. Lords who don’t have to worry about re-election are a “stubborn check” on the professional politicians in Parliament’s lower house.
This is Tony Blair’s fault, said Peter Oborne in Britain’s Daily Mail. In 1997, as prime minister, he set out to make the hereditary system of the House of Lords “fit for the 21st century.” Then, instead of demanding the same commitment to public service that encouraged integrity for centuries, he packed the chamber with Labor Party stooges and donors—making the House of Lords “synonymous with sleaze and corruption.”
THE WEEK'S AUDIOPHILE PODCASTS: LISTEN SMARTER
- 31 TV shows to watch in 2014
- Israel and Russia are getting along. Have the neocons noticed?
- Why I'm a pro-life liberal
- He said he was leaving. She ignored him.
- Why we can't stop procrastinating, according to science
- If a nuclear bomb exploded in downtown Washington, what should you do?
- What would a U.S.-Russia war look like?
- There's a number of reasons the grammar of this headline could infuriate you
- How Ukraine can fend off the Russians, in 7 simple steps
- How to be more satisfied with your life, according to science
Subscribe to the Week