"Can you keep a secret? Good! Well your in then!" (Nod to Monty Python)

Ok, imagine that you are involved with a highly powerful and influential organisation, you do not get paid apart from a daily allowance of £300 and you are approach by representatives of an outside body want to influence the decision makers in that organisation into changing the rules in their favour.

During the course of the conversation you say ' well, though it is against the rules for me to show any favouritism, I am able to bend, stretch and distort the rules until it fits what these bodies require and every time I do this, they pay me around £100,000.'

However, this conversation has been recorded and this statement becomes public knowledge and comes to the attention of your peers.

In a normal working environment, your peers would judge you as working against the interests of that organisation, report you to the chief decision maker and you would be removed from your post and everyone would feel that such action would be appropriate.

So why is there one rule for the majority of people living and working in the UK, who would would be sacked immediately from their post and escorted off the premises, and another for the Lords, who cannot?

They make an apology to their peers, and all is forgiven.

Maybe when some single parent who gets caught taking £3.00 per hour for some crummy little cleaning job to help feed her kids, or buy presents for Christmas can use the same defence as these unaccountable Lords.

Do you think it would wash? No, it wouldn't and the full weight of the law would fall upon their shoulders.

It is a clear case of one rule for our Feudal Overlords, and another for the peasantry.

Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong!!

Taken from BBC News

BBC NEWS | Politics | Peers respond to cash allegations

Sphere: Related Content