Monckton Is A Member Of The House Of Lords

By Collin Maessen on 13th March 2013comment

Climate Changes, But Facts Don’t: Debunking Monckton

On the 19th of July in 2011 the National Press Club of Australia held a debate on climate change. In this video I will be analysing the claims Monckton made during the debate and if they are correct or not.

The reason I’m doing this is that Monckton challenges his critics to check his sources, or like he put it in this debate “to do your homework”. I’m going to follow him up on this to see if the scientific literature, and other available sources, corroborate what he’s saying.

Watch this video on YouTube

Video description

On the 19th of July in 2011 the National Press Club of Australia held a debate on climate change. I will be analysing the claims Monckton made during the debate and if they are correct or not.

Here Monckton makes the claim that he is a member of the House of Lords, despite the House of Lords stating that he isn't. I'll be looking into the history of this claim and why Monckton has a different opinion on the matter.

Transcript

STEVE LEWIS:
Thank you. Next question from Alex Hart.

ALEX HART:
Alex Hart from the Seven Network. Sorry for interrupting there. I'm not sure if it's the right title to use, but my question is to Lord Monckton, asking about a letter that was written to you by David Beamish from the UK, Clark of the Parliament over there, saying that he'd like you to stop claiming that you are a Member of the House of Lords. What's your response to this? Will you stop using that title - why or why not? And does it harm your credibility?

CHRISTOPHER MONCKTON:
Sir, would you be kind enough to read out the words in this box on the passport page?

STEVE LEWIS:
The holder is the Right Honourable Christopher Walter Viscount Monckton of Brenchley.

CHRISTOPHER MONCKTON:
Thank you very much.

The House of Lords says I'm not a member of it; my passport says I am. Get used to it.

To give you some context on this matter let me read to you from the cease and desist letter that was sent on 15th of july in 2011 by the Clerk of the Parliaments:

My predecessor, Sir Michael Pownall, wrote to you on 21 July 2010, and again on 30 July 2010, asking that you cease claiming to be a Member of the House of Lords, either directly or by implication. It has been drawn to my attention that you continue to make such claims.

[...]

I must repeat my predecessor's statement that you are not and have never been a Member of the House of Lords. Your assertion that you are a Member, but without the right to sit or vote, is a contradiction in terms. No-one denies that you are, by virtue of your letters Patent, a Peer. That is an entirely separate issue to membership of the House. This is borne out by the recent judgment in Baron Mereworth v Ministry of Justice (Crown Office) where Mr Justice Lewison stated:

"In my judgment, the reference [in the House of Lords Act 1999] to 'a member of the House of Lords' is simply a reference to the right to sit and vote in that House ... In a nutshell, membership of the House of Lords means the right to sit and vote in that House. It does not mean entitlement to the dignity of a peerage."

I must therefore again ask that you desist from claiming to be a Member of the House of Lords, either directly or by implication, and also that you desist from claiming to be a Member "without the right to sit or vote".

This very clearly states that Monckton isn't a member. The title on his passport only indicates that he is a Peer that can be voted into the House of Lords.

Before the House of Lords Act of 1999 the seats in the House of Lords were inherited. This did include Monckton's father who lost his seat when the act was passed. From that point on his father had the same right as Monckton; to be voted in for a vacant seat. Monckton inherited this right when his father passed away in 2006.

And it's since 2006 that Monckton has been claiming that he is a member of the House of Lords. But despite Monckton offering himself as a candidate for a vacant seat he has failed to secure one each time.

Though Monckton has offered himself as a candidate he has publicly stated that he sees the House of Lords Act as flawed and unconstitutional. According to him this means his Letters Patent makes him a Member of the House of Lords, just not with the right to sit and vote.

That is the reason he claims that he is a member of the House of Lords. But the cease and desist letter I just quoted very clearly states that having a Letters Patent does not mean you are a member of the House of Lords. As that means you were voted in for a seat, Monckton has peerage and doesn't have a seat.

Until Monckton can make his case in court, and win this case that the act is flawed and unconstitutional, he cannot claim to be a member.