£90,000 worth of champagne ..

The upper house is a very useful moderator. Reform, yes - abolition, no. If people want to buy Champagne, let them. The quantity of Champagne purchased is not a valid indicator of the value or otherwise of the existence of the HoL.

Quite honestly I cannot get in the least bit excited by this. If tourists and members of the Lords want to buy champagne at £57 per bottle it's entirely their own affair and their money that they are spending.

I don't see it as a exceptional quantity, either. Average sales of 5 bottles per day over a year?

OTOH, if the price of this fizz is being subsidised in some way from the public purse so that Lords can buy decent champagne cheaply then it would be a bit of a scandal.

Why on earth selling champagne in the gift shop should be grounds for abolition of the Lords is a bit of a mystery.

Sounds more than a bit dog in the manger to me!

Surely they profit on the bottles of Champagne and serveral other items in the gift shop.
And yes I have paid over £57 for champagne.

I can think of many reasons to reform or even abolish the HOL but this is not one of them. Are we saying if you can afford to spend £57 on a bottle of champagne you can’t sit in the HOL? A spurious argument. We would have nobody in the upper house and surely it’s a free country to spend your money how you wish, provided as MaizieD says it’s not being subsidised from public funds? ( They probably do get the champagne cheaper by buying in bulk from the wholesaler)

More detail in this Guardian article and I still can't get excited about it, despite being a Guardian reader...

www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/jan/02/champagne-worth-90000-bought-in-house-of-lords-last-year-foi-data-shows

There are much more expensive bottles of champagne available in Tesco. I dont think Tesco should be abolished. There are many issues with regard to the HOL this isnt one of them.

And your point about the champagne being what, exactly, CvD66?

Can’t be Bollinger then!

The Guardian article points out that the champagne is not paid for by the taxpayer so unless we have gone full Communist, that’s okay? I suppose we could ask exactly what champagne is served to the Lords and at what cost?

Oh dear, envious or what. My daughter and family buy the best champagne when they want some, good for them, they can afford it, many tourists can also. Just think a bottle of champers with a house of Lords label on it being taken home to wherever. Good for the economy I say.

Freya5 what champagne counts as the best?

Approximately 8,000 people work in The Palace of Westminster added to which 1 million plus visit each year.

I think the amount of bottles of Champagne purchased is on the low side.

I am much more interested in the amount of alcohol consumed from the No 10 cellar during lockdown.

Oh dear, envious or what.

I don't think anyone is being 'envious' at all, Freya. We seem to have a rare moment of agreement on this thread.

Agreement that it's a non story...

CvD66

..bought in the House of Lords last year (FOI details obtained). While it is claimed that this was mostly bought by tourists, sadly no figures were given to support this. Would you pay £57 for a bottle of champagne in the gift shop? It cannot be ignored that this is an exceptional quantity of champagne = 1589 bottles! Given the latest appointments (particularly from the 45 day PM Liz Truss) is this institution in need of reform or even better, abolishment?

I’m sorry to have to tell you this but in the great scheme of things 1589 bottles of champagne is not an exceptional quantity. Get real. Even if only bought by peers it is two bottles each a year. I had at least 4 bottles last year for various family celebrations. If you want to complain about the HOL at least pick something scandalous.

Not in the least envious. I don’t enjoy Champagne, the only exception being Dom Perignon.

Sounds good to me, at least you get some lovely fizzy moments for £57.
Not like spending very nearly that on a 'bouffant' for a VERY naughty white dog who rolls in poo on the way home.

No lovely fizzy moments there......

I don't care what tourists or anyone else spends their own money on but I do object to taxes being used to subsidise the Commons and Lords bars and restaurants. By all mean have a staff canteen but pay the going rate for what you eat and drink.

And I agree with the OP. The House of Lords does need reforming. Why should someone sit in the House and make decisions that affect all of us simply because they were born in a particular bed or have done some PM a good turn e.g.donating a lot of money to his Party or campaign, or happen to be a Bishop of the C of E. I'm not tarring all members of the House of Lords with the same brush. I'm sure some work very hard with the best interests of the people at heart and a second house of some sort is necessary. I just think we should be thinking about ways to reform it to make it even more effective in it's role.

I personally wouldn’t want to buy any gifts in the HoL gift shop and would purchase my fine wine from a reputable wine shop.

However, we absolutely require a second Chamber, reformed yes! Abolished, certainly not!

I’d stop all the outgoing PMs sticking their cronies in and reform the way in which people are appointed, we need a body of people to act as “governors” for our HoC.

Galaxy

I agree 100%

Freya

I very much doubt ANY of us are in the slightest bit jealous and as for “good champagne” like “fine wine” it’s often a matter of personal taste. I once had a French friend who was a sommelier. His assertion was the small the bubbles in champagne the better the champagne would be 🍾🥂

I do t understand it either. Perhaps we are missing something?

The price quoted isnt all that exceptional for reasonable quality champagne, plus there is the premium of tourist attraction.