Unlike their colleagues down the corridor on the green benches, in the House of Lords reading speeches out loud is considered poor form. M’lords and ladies expect their fellow peers to speak without notes, lest they be confused with the elected hoi-polloi they share a palace with.
Not so Michael Farmer, a Conservative peer who spoke out in defence of reading aloud in the House this week – albeit for a rather odd reason.
Farmer was speaking out after fellow peer, the hereditary crossbencher Simon Russell, was having the standard moan about the practice. “I draw your Lordships’ attention to paragraph 4.46 on page 63 of the Companion, entitled ‘Reading of Speeches’,” said Russell, who has sat in the Lords since 1981. “I will read it out very clearly so that everybody can understand what it says.
Suggested Reading
Sharon! Tories seek some celebrity stardust in Brum
“The House has resolved that the reading of speeches is ‘alien to the custom of this House, and injurious to the traditional conduct of its debates’. It is acknowledged, however, that on some occasions, for example ministerial statements – or statements from frontbench speakers – it is necessary to read from a prepared text. In practice, some speakers may wish to have ‘extended notes’ from which to speak, but it is not in the interests of good debate that they should follow them closely’.”
This brought about an intervention from Farmer, who thought of another occasion notes might be needed – when it’s women speaking! “In response to the noble Lord, Lord Russell, the Companion says that we should not read speeches, but there is an argument that that is classist and sexist,” he said, to raised eyebrows.
“Many women are not used to speaking ad lib… well, they are not. Many of us have not been parliamentarians for long, and we have not been at the right schools that have debating societies.” Farmer has been a parliamentarian for 12 years, and boarded at Wantage Grammar School. Still, what an ally!
