A footnote to our previous coverage of Lords McAlpine and Laidlaw, two non-dom Conservative members of the House of Lords. They had both for a long time been unmoved by criticism of their tax affairs, but ahead of changes to the law they have both decided to give up their seats in the Lords.
Lord McAlpine’s case was relatively straight-forward, but Lord Laidlaw’s case had the added twist that he broke a promise he made on being appointed. Indeed, the Lords Appointment Commission was subsequently moved to say that they would not have authorised his peerage if they had known he was going to break his promise to cease being a tax exile.
David Cameron’s willingness to turn a blind eye to this (he not only didn’t withdraw the party whip, but the Conservatives carried on taking donations from Laidlaw) always contrasted very poorly with his actions against some Conservative MPs.
Let’s hope that under Lords reform that if any appointed peers remain, breaking commitments in such a way in future results in expulsion from the House of Lords.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
The Joy of Six 1590
What is Christian nationalism?
Latest PollBase is out, with all the British voting intention polls since the 1930s
Tristan Ward
Matt (Bristol)
Geoff Reid
David Raw
David Warren
4 Comments
Good riddance, don’t come back.
Can we consider the impact ownership of our news media by non-doms has, too?
I’ll second that, Paul.
And also work to ensure that there are no unelected people in Parliament at all, unless they are called to give evidence before a select committee, which seems a far more democratic way of benefitting from the experience of the retired great and good.
During the election there was a survey done on non-doms and it concluded that the ordinary voter didn’t care about the issue because having non-dom status is an aspiration for most. It isn’t an illegal activity is it? It’s immoral perhaps. Zac Goldsmith got in. Did people care? No.