Why should Tory MSP Ruth Davidson get ride on the House of Lords gravy train?

At a time when millions are worried about their jobs and the future for their family, the already bloated and outdated House of Lords is to be swelled even further with a list of chums hand picked by Boris Johnson for services to the Tory Party and for helping persuade Britain to vote for Brexit.

How can anyone at this time think spending time drawing up this list is merited.

And what legitimate purpose does the House of Lords serve?

The latest batch of lifelong freeloaders is to include former Scottish Tory leader, Ruth Davidson.

One feature of the Lords is it is supposedly a place where those with something to offer, but who are no longer elected politicians, are sent to scrutinise legislation and continue to give the country the benefit of their years of political experience and wisdom.

There are also some who are sent there for their expertise in other fields like medicine, law or business and who certainly could have an argument made of having something valuable to offer.

Then there are the Lords Spiritual, Church of England Bishops, and the remaining hereditary lords whose only purposes seems to be to embarrass the notion of parliamentary democracy.

There are 26 Bishops in the House of Lords (god knows why they are in there) and 92 hereditary peers.

There because they hold a title passed on to them from their father, and his father and his father and so on until someone stole land and gained a title. None of them certainly merit it in any legitimate sense.

So what expertise does Ms Davidson bring to the House of Lords.

She has never been in Government, never been in charge of a budget, never really had any actual power or responsibility whatsoever.

While Tory leader, she spent the last four years as an Edinburgh MSP.

Before that she was a Glasgow list MSP not that many people in either city would’ve noticed terribly much, except when it came to looking for votes.

Her stated loyalty to Glasgow quickly disappeared in a cloud of party jiggery pokery to maximise Tory support.

I could probably chop off several of my fingers and still count on the one hand Ruth Davidson’s achievements as a Glasgow MSP.

Having served less than ten years, had Ruth Davidson’s Holyrood stint been a football career she wouldn’t even qualify for a testimonial match.

But her reward for doing a lot of shouting and posing on tanks is to have a job for life in the UK’s upper chamber.

Given her reasons for standing down as Tory leader, to spend more time with her partner and their son it is interesting Ms Davidson has  accepted a position and remains to be seen how much time she actually spends hundreds of miles away in London.

But it would be unfair to single out Ms Davidson in the list of those deemed worthy of a gift of a seat in Parliament.

The list is believed to include former Tory Chancellors Ken Clarke and Phillip Hammond.

If we are to be stuck with an archaic institution that is riddled with patronage and no accountability to the public then I suppose two long serving politicians who have held posts at the top of government would pass the test.

Phillip Hammond

There are plenty old Labour government ministers in the house, like Alistair Darling, Helen Liddell and Jack McConnell.

But it only serves the argument that the Lords is a retirement club for old politicians where they can still bump into old pals and have a natter over a champagne lunch.

A sort of miners’ welfare club for toffs.

Then we move from the ridiculous to the ludicrous

Ian Botham, former England cricketer, once one of the most famous and celebrated sportsmen in England is also expected to be fitted out for the ermine trimmed robes.

The House of Lords costs somewhere in the region of £120m and £23m of that is on expenses and allowances.

It has been reported that more than 110 peers claimed a combined total of over £1m in expenses one year , but were not recorded as having made any written or spoken contribution in the House.

Some are able to rack up more in allowances than an MP’s annual take home salary.

The £305 a day doesn’t include travel expenses or subsidised meals in the Palace of Westminster restaurants.

Surely, somewhere in the House of Lords there can be someone who could make a coherent argument for a better use of that £120m.

There has to be a way of harnessing the skills and experience of those outside party politics to improve government without the absurd spectacle of landed gentry, bishops and pals who have been booted from office, clinging to power few of them ever deserved in the first place.

Just don’t expect the answer to come from any of those gifted their meal ticket for life by Boris Johnson.