The Apprentice star Lord Sugar was told “You’re fired” as he was accused of treating Parliament with “contempt” over his long-running failure to take part in proceedings.
The business tycoon was given a dose of his own boardroom medicine after being sworn in at Westminster, where he has not spoken in the upper chamber for six years.
It is understood the Amstrad founder only narrowly avoided being kicked out of the House for non-attendance by turning up on the last day of the previous parliamentary session.
Under the current rules, there are no requirements for participation beyond attendance for a peer to maintain their seat.
Many peers had already made the required pledge of allegiance at the despatch box ahead of the summer break, following the election and return of Parliament.
According to the parliamentary record, Lord Sugar’s last spoken contribution in the Lords was in October 2018.
It also shows the independent crossbencher has not voted since 2017 and has never asked a written question.
A participation requirement by members of the unelected chamber had been proposed by Labour as part of a package of Lords reforms in its election manifesto, alongside a mandatory retirement age of 80, and the removal of hereditary peers.
However, only the latter proposal is currently being taken forward in legislation.
It was as Lord Sugar was being sworn in that Labour former minister Lord Foulkes of Cumnock turned the tables and, pointing across the floor of the chamber, shouted: “You’re fired!”
He later said of Lord Sugar: “He is one of the peers who treats the House with contempt.
“There is a growing feeling that we should tighten up the requirements, not just for attendance but also for participation, and kick out those who are not meeting a minimum of both.”
There have been ongoing concerns about the size of the Lords and calls to reduce its membership – which stands at around 800, compared with the 650 capped number of MPs.
Lord Sugar’s representatives have been contacted for comment.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel