James O’Brien Instantly Stumps Brexiteer's Argument Against House Of Lords
10 May 2018, 13:58
This Brexiteer's argument against the House of Lords completely fell apart seconds into this conversation with James O’Brien.
Paul phoned LBC in a bid to highlight a “conflict of interest” between some peers receiving EU pensions and at the same time making decisions on Britain’s departure from the EU.
It’s after the government suffered 14 defeats in the House of Lords as its flagship Brexit bill passed through the chamber.
“I’d like to point out the hypocrisy that exists in the House of Lords,” Paul began in his call to James.
“There are a number of Lords who are in receipt of an EU pension.
"To receive that pension they have to have sworn an oath of allegiance to the EU, the Commission and associated bodies.”
And after denying there were any Ukip peers in the Lords, Paul continued: “Anybody receiving an EU pension is a clear conflict of interest and they should have absolutely no influence on the democratic process of this country.”
So James came up with three points which saw the wheels of the caller’s argument fall off rather quickly.
“First of all there are Ukip representatives in the House of Lords,” he said.
“Second of all, every Ukip MEP would be expecting to get EU pensions and the idea that they’ve sworn an oath of allegiance to the EU and its institutions is certainly interesting.
“And third of all, what makes you think [the Lords] are not going to keep their pensions after we’ve left the European Union? Because they’ve all said they are.”
Paul replied: “Is there or is there not a clear conflict of interest?”
James simply responded: “No. I’ve answered your question to save you some breath. No.”
But Paul wasn’t finished there - and you can watch the rather entertaining row above.