Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Michelle Mone should be stripped of peerage

80 replies

nomas · 04/02/2026 10:03

Following the announcement that Peter Mandelson has resigned his peerage under threat of it being stripped from him, why are the calls for Michelle Mone to be stripped of hers being ignored?

YANBU: Mone’s peerage to be stripped ASAP
YABU: She should be allowed to reman in the House of Lords

OP posts:
peanutbuttertoasty · 04/02/2026 10:46

Democratic elections hardly equates to quality control either, if the lower house is anything to go by. Not a defence of the current system. I don’t know what the ideal is.

SerendipityJane · 04/02/2026 10:52

OvernightBloats · 04/02/2026 10:35

I raised an eyebrow when she was given a peerage in the first place - it was all about the connections she had and not particularly her achievements.

There should be a panel of people who decide on who gets peerages which would hopefully mean that dubious appointments like Michelle Mone would decrease.

There should be a panel of people who decide on who gets peerages

There is.

SerendipityJane · 04/02/2026 10:53

ADayAwayFromYourHeart · 04/02/2026 10:35

That's not how it works, though. A peerage is bestowed by the monarch.

"The Monarch" does fuck all without government advice.

And having receive the advice, the Monarch has to follow it.

Unless you are old enough to remember Queen Anne ?

PashaMinaMio · 04/02/2026 10:53

Ohnonononotagain · 04/02/2026 10:22

Michelle Mone was the first person I thought of when the calls started for legislation to make it straightforward to strip people of their peerage.

That Mone was ever made a peer in the first place beggars belief .

The Labour Party have been making noises for years about reforming the House of Lords and the sooner we have an elected Upper Chamber the better.

This^
I entirely agree.
Sooner shes out, the better.

ADayAwayFromYourHeart · 04/02/2026 10:55

SerendipityJane · 04/02/2026 10:53

"The Monarch" does fuck all without government advice.

And having receive the advice, the Monarch has to follow it.

Unless you are old enough to remember Queen Anne ?

Try and understand my point. The monarch bestows peerages. Without new legislation, no peer can be "stripped" of their peerage, just because a committee submitted them for it.

And if MPs can vote to strip a peer of their peerage, where does it stop? It essentially creates a totally new House of Lords system. Which is why constitutional experts are saying it's not as easy as it looks.

ADayAwayFromYourHeart · 04/02/2026 10:57

Goldfsh · 04/02/2026 10:41

I would think that conviction of illegal activity or breaching parliamentary code should be sufficient. And perhaps being a Director of firms breaching government contracts to the tune of 25 million.

Well that's three different criteria.

ADayAwayFromYourHeart · 04/02/2026 10:59

OvernightBloats · 04/02/2026 10:35

I raised an eyebrow when she was given a peerage in the first place - it was all about the connections she had and not particularly her achievements.

There should be a panel of people who decide on who gets peerages which would hopefully mean that dubious appointments like Michelle Mone would decrease.

There is a panel. Not everybody who is submitted is approved.

OvernightBloats · 04/02/2026 10:59

SerendipityJane · 04/02/2026 10:52

There should be a panel of people who decide on who gets peerages

There is.

If that is the case, it is not stringent enough. David Cameron appointed her for a peerage in the first place. I wonder if there is massive pressure to follow through with the Prime Minister's wishes even if his choice is not the best.

Tigerbalmshark · 04/02/2026 11:00

Henriettafromdablox · 04/02/2026 10:09

The wider issue here is handing out titles and a place in the upper house at the whim of the prime minister.

I see a role for an upper chamber but it needs radical reform and to be based on some form of democratic vote, rather than patronage.

Yep - the 20 year old intern who was supposedly Boris’s ex-girlfriend/secret daughter was particularly bad. Clearly placed in the Lords as some sort of pay-off/settlement (just as he tried to get Carrie a £100k job in the Foreign office that she was completely unqualified for, simply to make it easier to shag her when he was still married to Marina), but it looks absolutely ludicrous and unsurprisingly she doesn’t really show her face there, just pockets the income.

ADayAwayFromYourHeart · 04/02/2026 11:00

OvernightBloats · 04/02/2026 10:59

If that is the case, it is not stringent enough. David Cameron appointed her for a peerage in the first place. I wonder if there is massive pressure to follow through with the Prime Minister's wishes even if his choice is not the best.

What would she have been disapproved for, at the time he nominated her?

OvernightBloats · 04/02/2026 11:05

ADayAwayFromYourHeart · 04/02/2026 11:00

What would she have been disapproved for, at the time he nominated her?

Not about disapproval and more about approval. The system of appointing a particular person because of favouritism and connections by an individual is flawed. Michelle Mone is an example of this.

ADayAwayFromYourHeart · 04/02/2026 11:10

OvernightBloats · 04/02/2026 11:05

Not about disapproval and more about approval. The system of appointing a particular person because of favouritism and connections by an individual is flawed. Michelle Mone is an example of this.

Well that is the current honours system we have. And if MPs voted for the upper house, then only the government of the day, with their majority, would get any peers appointed at all. At least this system is fairer in that sense - each party can nominate peers, according to their parliamentary party size.

deeahgwitch · 04/02/2026 11:10

If they can strip Andrew MB of his title of Prince surely they can strip peers of their titles. Particularly ones who were not hereditary peers.

SerendipityJane · 04/02/2026 11:12

ADayAwayFromYourHeart · 04/02/2026 10:55

Try and understand my point. The monarch bestows peerages. Without new legislation, no peer can be "stripped" of their peerage, just because a committee submitted them for it.

And if MPs can vote to strip a peer of their peerage, where does it stop? It essentially creates a totally new House of Lords system. Which is why constitutional experts are saying it's not as easy as it looks.

Edited

I didn't want the whole corrupt system in the first place, so am not best placed to try and score pedant points with. I have agitated for an elected chamber since I was doing my O levels.

regardless of what "The Monarch" may or may not do or want to do, when they do do (or do not do) it is invariably because the government has told them to (or not to).

So whilst the smartarse answer "peerages are only bestowed by the monarch" is true, it's a little bit like saying planes only fly because they have wings. True as far as it goes, but hiding rather a lot of complexity.

SerendipityJane · 04/02/2026 11:13

OvernightBloats · 04/02/2026 10:59

If that is the case, it is not stringent enough. David Cameron appointed her for a peerage in the first place. I wonder if there is massive pressure to follow through with the Prime Minister's wishes even if his choice is not the best.

Who one earth said the criteria were "stringent" ? Or indeed related to probity ?

ADayAwayFromYourHeart · 04/02/2026 11:13

deeahgwitch · 04/02/2026 11:10

If they can strip Andrew MB of his title of Prince surely they can strip peers of their titles. Particularly ones who were not hereditary peers.

Only one person could strip Andrew of his titles. And if the Monarch suddenly started to decide to start stripping peers of theirs, that would be a bit strange, no?

So, parliament needs to find a way to ask/tell the monarch to strip a peer of their title. They need to decide the mechanism, and what the criteria are.

It's nothing like as "simple" as people seem to think.

SerendipityJane · 04/02/2026 11:14

OvernightBloats · 04/02/2026 11:05

Not about disapproval and more about approval. The system of appointing a particular person because of favouritism and connections by an individual is flawed. Michelle Mone is an example of this.

Who says it is flawed ? None of the people who it benefits.

Your views are irrelevant.

ADayAwayFromYourHeart · 04/02/2026 11:14

SerendipityJane · 04/02/2026 11:12

I didn't want the whole corrupt system in the first place, so am not best placed to try and score pedant points with. I have agitated for an elected chamber since I was doing my O levels.

regardless of what "The Monarch" may or may not do or want to do, when they do do (or do not do) it is invariably because the government has told them to (or not to).

So whilst the smartarse answer "peerages are only bestowed by the monarch" is true, it's a little bit like saying planes only fly because they have wings. True as far as it goes, but hiding rather a lot of complexity.

Exactly. There is a lot more complexity to this system, and changing it, than people realise.

SerendipityJane · 04/02/2026 11:15

Only one person could strip Andrew of his titles. And if the Monarch suddenly started to decide to start stripping peers of theirs, that would be a bit strange, no?

The day any monarch decides to do anything on their own would be their last day as monarch.

nomas · 04/02/2026 11:15

ADayAwayFromYourHeart · 04/02/2026 10:35

That's not how it works, though. A peerage is bestowed by the monarch.

That's what what were told months ago about Andrew, that it's extremely difficult to stripe his title of Prince and other titles.

And lo and behold, within 2 days it was done.

We know that things are possible when special measures are taken.

OP posts:
ADayAwayFromYourHeart · 04/02/2026 11:15

SerendipityJane · 04/02/2026 11:14

Who says it is flawed ? None of the people who it benefits.

Your views are irrelevant.

Your views are irrelevant.

Very democratic, aren't you?!

ADayAwayFromYourHeart · 04/02/2026 11:16

nomas · 04/02/2026 11:15

That's what what were told months ago about Andrew, that it's extremely difficult to stripe his title of Prince and other titles.

And lo and behold, within 2 days it was done.

We know that things are possible when special measures are taken.

But these are two different systems.

SerendipityJane · 04/02/2026 11:16

ADayAwayFromYourHeart · 04/02/2026 11:14

Exactly. There is a lot more complexity to this system, and changing it, than people realise.

I disagree. The whole system could be erased with a single sentence law.

Don't confuse "can't" with "won't".

SerendipityJane · 04/02/2026 11:17

ADayAwayFromYourHeart · 04/02/2026 11:15

Your views are irrelevant.

Very democratic, aren't you?!

Prove me wrong.

OvernightBloats · 04/02/2026 11:17

SerendipityJane · 04/02/2026 11:14

Who says it is flawed ? None of the people who it benefits.

Your views are irrelevant.

Irrelevant in your opinion. Many people will share my views. Are you saying that anyone who has an opposing view to you is irrelevant?!