The point that members of the House of Lords bring to the House a substantial body of experience is frequently made. The range of experience, as shown in previous quizzes, is wide. This week the focus is peers who have served the nation overseas in different capacities. I have previously asked about peers who have served in different roles in the EU. This quiz goes a little wider. As usual, the first two readers to supply the correct answers will be the winners. If no one gets all the correct answers, the ones getting the most correct will win.
1. Name two members of the current House of Lords who have served as the UK Permanent Representative to the United Nations.
2. Name two members of the current House who have served as High Commissioner to Australia.
3. Which peer has previously served as the Deputy Secretary-General of the United Nations?
4. Which member of the House of Lords has previously served as UK Ambassador to Syria and Saudi Arabia?
5. Which member of the House of Lords was the UK Ambassador to France at the time of the death in Paris of Diana, Princess of Wales?
1. B. Richard; B. Hannay.
2. B. Liddell; B. Goodlad.
3. B. Malloch-Brown.
4. B. Wright of Richmond.
5. B. Jay of Ewelme.
((( Overlapping ‘sub-topic’,please:
“…that members of the House of Lords bring to the House a substantial body of experience…”
needs to be balancedly dichotomised between Workplace-expertise(s) and Lifeplace-strival*-experience(s)
– – – and both need to show their sustainworthy-elements, essential to be conserved or carried-forward – – -.
* ‘strival’ as a constructive-derivative from ‘striving’ ‘strife’; Please ))).
milesjsd: We certainly do have some peers who have workplace experience and who began life at the sharp end.
Some? Hows does a handful help?
Car mechanics helping decide on medical bills?
Politicians who are responsible for the massive government debts and who have been sent packing by the electorate, or who like Alan Sugar have donated large sums to a party pack the Lords.
Patronage results in very little questioning of what is going on. Combine that with whipping, and that’s not the sort favoured by at least two ministers in the commons, even more means that there is no democracy.
lord blagger: You don’t need several people to tell you the same thing.
Well, how many car mechanics (or other trades) are there in the Lords?
How many MPs who have been kicked out by the electorate?
How many party donors are members of the Lords? eg. Sugars or Braggs?
The last two out number the first by a large margin.
Why is that? Ah yes, brown nosing.
Lord Blagger, are you saying the combination of patronage and whipping makes the Lords worse than an elected chamber? I rather thought politicians would be more likely to toe the party line if they need to worry about being re-elected.
Not being able to vote them out doesn’t make them democratic. It makes them dictators.
lord blagger: We have members with a remarkable range of skills, including knowing how to build ‘planes. I think we have rather more former MPs who were never kicked out by the electorate than we do unsuccessful candidates. There’s nothing to stop car mechanics putting their names forward to the Appointments Commission.
That’s a relief, thank you.
A supplementary comes flashing to mind unexpectedly (which little doubt should be carried forward to ‘elsewhere’):
=========================
(“) what would be a reasonably-detailed ‘break-down’ for each Member, between Workplace expertise(s) (on the one hand) and Lifeplace experience/sustainworthy-abilties* (on the other or ?at the ‘sharp end’?) ? (“)
* = vis a vis “Angels dancing on pinheads…”, “old totem poles”, and “toads blocking fountains”.
=====================================
1. Lord Richard, Lord Hannay
2. Lord Goodlad, Baroness Amos
3. Lord Malloch-Brown
4. Lord Wright
5. Lord Jay
1. Lord Richard (in post 1974-79)
Lord Hannay of Chiswick (1990-1995)
2. Lord Goodlad (2000-2005)
Baroness Amos (2009-2010)
3. Lord Malloch-Brown (2006)
4. Lord Wright of Richmond
5. Lord Jay of Ewelme
1. Lord Hannay of Chiswick, Lord Richard
2. Baroness Liddell of Coatdyke, Baroness Amos
3. Lord Malloch-Brown
4. Lord Wright of Richmond
5. Lord Jay of Ewelme
Incidentally, today is the second anniversary of my visit to the Lords as a competition prize. The date is easy to remember given its other historical significance!
I don’t know what it is about Lord Norton’s Quizes which does not appeal! It may be my own concern with ideas and not personalities, content and not form!
What do personalities matter, when the question is good law, but…..ok may the quiz business be brisk!
gar
D’accord, Gareth;
it is not exactly that ‘one man’s meat is another man’s poison’,
but for my sensibility, perhaps similarly to that expressed by yourself, is that
“Without basic participatory-democracy educational e-sites for the ‘masses’,
such somewhat lone ‘professionally-esoteric’ and somewhat ‘isolated’) quizzes (notwithstanding this salient one being steadfastly supplied every week by Lord Norton) would (and we would possibly argue ‘should’) have only a limited participation and following”.
————–
Once some of the ‘masses’ have been safely ‘recruited’ into participatory-democratisation e-sites, there is little doubt that Lord Norton’s weekly specialised quiz would soon be swamped by a wider cross-section ‘up-surge’, of eager new participatory-readers, wouldn’t it ?
Congrstulations to all four readers who supplied answer. Each provided a list of correct answers (even if Martyn Atkins decided they were all Baronesses!)
The answer to the first question was confined to two (Lord Richard, Lord Hannay), there was a choice of two out of three for the second (Baroness Liddell, Baroness Amos, and Lord Goodlad) and the remaining answers were, indeed, Lord Malloch-Brown, Lord Wright of Richmond, and Lord Jay of Ewelme.
As Martyn Atkins and Dave H were the first two to respond and are therefore this week’s winners.
Jason Lower was just pipped at the post, and Jonathan has the consolation of knowing that he is already a grand prize-winner second time round and has an open invitation to tea at the Lords. I shall shortly be contacting one or two others who have now qualified as grand prize-winners.
Dear oh! Dear! Lord Richard, 1984?
Why bother!!
Constitutionalism is surely about semantics to confuse the issue; personalities to impress.
If it works? Use it!
[Heh!Heh! Important lectures on the 1911 act!
Wow! Even Bercow/Speaker’s dept. persuaded of it!]
If it works; use it!
If it does not? Forget it!
lord blagger: We have members with a remarkable range of skills
The usual blather.
All of them intensely concerned with status and a sense of self importance.
Gar: Actually, there are notable for not being self important.
That would figure, because their ‘notability’ is quite limited to the Workplace, and embraces taking-from-the-Workplace-into-the-Lifeplace much power, privilege, and high-remuneration several-times bigger than one-human-living;
(Note: I am stipulating a clear distinction between Workplace-Skills (and Skillings) versus Lifeplace-Abilities (Enablements) ):
whereas within the Lifeplace itself they remain personally and communally ineffective at, and majorly reactionary against, such traditionally-cultural and modernly life-improving human-development advances as
Domestic Shoe-String-Budgeting,
Organic Companion-Plant Kitchen-Gardening,
Bicycle-travel-improvement,
Sustainwortrhy Personal Efficiency
(that’ll do as a start for the ‘traditional’ Lifeplace human-abilities;
and now under ‘modern’ Lifeplace human-development):
Friendly Method III Needs & Hows Recognition and Neighbourly Cooperative Problem Solving;
“The New Rules of Posture”;
“Perceptual Self-Control” (as distinct from control-of-others), and
“Continual Self-Awarenessing Heals both One-self and Others-in-contact”;
“Six Co-Constructive Thinking-Modes”;
and even a further list of Lifeplace enablements** poached from some workplace or from some training-centre-uiniversity thereto:
“Fast Thinking Manager’s Manual” (Jay & Templar 2nd edn)
“Critical Thinking Skills” (Stella Cottrell 2nd edn)
—————————————
I trust you ‘get my drift’
I wonder what the remarkable skill is that Lord Norton has? He spends 24 hours a day on politics but what remarkable skill does he have? Does he dig his own garden, repair a vintage car regularly? What skill does he have?
Alice in Wonderland may have an answer.
Alice doesn’t but I do.
Heh! Heh!