2nd June 2015 | Politics
25th May 2015 | Politics
On the Sunday 24th May edition of TeenScope (with Joseph Perry), Joseph interviewed political journalist Henry Davies about the abolition of the House of Lords.
In a recent article for the website Whippersnapper, Davies called the House of Lords 'a true enemy of democracy', provoking much thought and discussion online.
Joseph wanted to know why Davies held these views, while asking TeenScope listeners if they also believed in Lords Abolition.
The results were as follow:
Here's the transcripted interview in full:
Joseph Perry: Let’s start with what you called an ‘archaic tradition’; the House of Lords. What is so ‘archaic’ about the institution?
Henry Davies: It is so old fashioned in everything about it. We have Lords and Ladies and Barons and Baronesses and, still, the hereditary side - with 92 hereditary Peers which are being phased out, but nonetheless are there. The Lords are paid £300 per day just to turn up in an attendance allowance, they don’t even have to vote, they are unelected, and the average age is about 70. So you can see where I am coming from on the ‘archaic’ side.
Joseph Perry: I can see where you are coming from, but there are lots of people who say that the House of Lords has worked well for centuries. Why is there a sudden urge to abolish it now?
Henry Davies: I have heard that point a lot actually. People say ‘well, it works - if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it’. But the evidence is that there has always been a will to change things. I spoke to a prominent Labour backbencher, Dennis Skinner, for my article on Whippersnapper. In 1976 he led a resolution to…
16th May 2015 | Politics
On the Sunday 10th May edition of TeenScope (with Joseph Perry), Joseph conducted an on-air, two-sided debate about the media coverage of Princess Charlotte of Cambridge, the latest addition to the royal household.
In the debate he interviewed Thomas Mace Archer Mills, Chairman of the British Monarchist Foundation, and Graham Smith, Chairman of Republic. The topic being questioned was whether the royal family had exploited the birth of Princess Charlotte for their own benefit.
The results were as follow:
Here's what happened during Joseph Perry's first interview, with Graham Smith, Chairman of Republic.
Joseph Perry: Let’s start with the term “exploitation”. We’re using that in our question tonight because it’s how you, personally, described the palace’s use of Princess Charlotte. Why did you use such a term?
Graham Smith: It’s simply the case that a birth is a private and personal event and the Palace always uses these private and personal events (whether it’s a birth or a wedding) to promote itself. They have a particular image that they want to promote and, specifically around these types of events, they want to reinforce two ideas: 1. They are popular and 2. They are largely harmless and it’s just a matter of the monarchy being something about celebration and events, rather than about politics and power.
Joseph Perry: Having said that, in the UK, whether we agree with it or not, there is a system of monarchy. Therefore it is important that the public see them as much as possible, isn’t it?
Graham Smith: Whether or not we seem them is neither here nor there – the point is, how are they portrayed and how do the media respond. The monarchy may want…