KHOODEELAAR! challenging UK House of Peers 'leader' 'Baroness Royall' to justify her suggestion that she knows what goes on in the DISCREDITED House

0900 Hrs GMT London Wednesday 28 January 2009


Months before the actual sitting of the hocus pocus 'Select Committee' cobbled together to give an impression that they were following procedures, KHOODEELAAR! The campaign against the Crossrail Bill contacted the 'officials' in the UK House of Lords'.

The officials said that the 'Crossrail Bill' 'Select Committee' organisations had yet to be established in the 'Upper Chamfer' and that the staff were still at work on the details. They said they would let us know once the preparations were completed.

We allowed them time to do so before we made contacts again.

In the mean time, as we were waiting for the 'House of Lords' officials to get ready for the 'CrossRail Bill', we wrote and published a number of comments on the internet. Including on the Times, London, web site.

We set out the constitutional and the democratic duties of the UK House of Lords.

And in particular we also focussed attention on the then just published examples of idiocies by one of the CRASS role playing 'ministers' [an MP] in the Crossrail-peddling UK Department for Transport. Tom Harris.

Harris has since left 'the Govt'..

As we had warned that he would do. As we had observed that he SHOULD do. We had on the evidence of his utterances concluded that Harris was behaving in a typically crass, unconstitutional way.


This set of activities by KHOODEELAAR! in seeking to draw attention to the constitutional law role of the ‘Upper House’ was way away from the realities of the ‘House of Peers’ itself. While we gave them a deliberately extended scope to prove that they were worthy of respect, THEY could not be further from that standard.

While we argued for the ‘House of Peers’ to be given the freedom to do what we said was the prime the main duty, the main job of the UK House of 'Lords' [=PEERS], THE HOUSE ITSELF was unwilling to uphold that dignified status we were giving them.

So when ‘Baroness’ {What a worryingly unjustified, unconstitutional and pompous word that is] Royall [!!!] uttered on Monday 26 January 2009 that she was aware that the ‘House’ had been discredited throughout the world by the revelations about the four named ‘peers’, she could not have been more clueless.

If she was telling the truth that is.

Assuming that SHE at least was telling the truth, she should not be ‘leader’ of that House at all.


[To be continued]