|Viscount Monckton appearing not to be a peer (officially)|
I wonder if Mr.Beamish has got it right. What is membership exactly? There are plenty of companies that have shareholders and some are more equal than others. Some don't have voting rights. Are non-voting shareholders still shareholders or are they just claiming to be shareholders "either directly or by implication". Sports clubs have playing and non-playing members. So what about hereditary peers who are on the Register of Hereditary Peers? Are they members or are they just on a list? Only hereditary peers can be on the register. So they have some membership of the House of Lords, if in name only, surely?
Is Mr.Beamish a closet Blairite? They know how to emulate Humpty Dumpty, with Tony Blair being the first in the line-up. I'd say Viscount Monckton has a point. He's on the register. Therefore he's a member "but without the right to sit or vote". Mr.Beamish wrote a stuffy letter to Viscount Monckton. I've read it. I think it makes no sense other than to suggest Mr.Beamish may have an agenda. How's that for unofficial confirmation?