Insanity!!!!

The Telegraph devotes a leading article to bleating (1) about Labour's latest white paper on reform of the House of Lords. This is odd, since it is pointed out that "Mr Straw was forced to admit that nothing will happen this side of a general election." Why waste a column complaining about Labour wasting time on this chimera? It is noted that "We are in the grip of an economic crisis and our soldiers are fighting on two fronts" (2). Indeed. So why not write columns about that?

The article continues:

For the Government still has not made a coherent case for change. Ministers may see this as a piece of unfinished business following the spiteful removal of all but 92 hereditary peers in Labour's first term. (3)

This is the pure stuff of madness. First, the burden is on the supporters of the Lords to make the case for their retentions - the House of Lords, even in its partially reformed format, is a ghastly thing and the onus is on those who don't support its immediate demolition to explain themselves. Secondly, how on Earth is removing hereditary peers 'spiteful'? Only the truly insane would argue - with a straight face - that there is anyplace for hereditary peers in the 21st 20th 19th century. We've actully be outstandingly tolerant, allowing the spawn of a decayed aristocracy to shuffle about, hanging on to their privileges and powers for so long. These fools exercised real, meaningful power over us. Taking it away from them was not spiteful - it was sane.

Next, I suspect, the Telegraph will rail against the malicious Parliament Act of 1911. Probably, that attempt to limit the powers of the arsitocracy and their ability to defy the Commons will be described as 'malicious.' And Magna Carta written off as 'misguided and politically correct.'

Welcome to Telegraphland.

1 - "The House of Lords: leave well alone," leading article in The Telegraph, 15th of July, 2008. (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/07/15/dl1501.xml)
2 - ibid.
3 - ibid.