From The Telegraph:
The first Supreme Court judge to not be given a life peerage has revealed his disappointment in Theresa May for denying him the honor.
Lord Dyson, who adopted the courtesy title when he joined the highest court in the land, had been expecting a role in the House of Lords when he retired in October 2016.
In his memoirs, to be published next month, he reveals a peerage had been within his grasp when David Cameron, then Prime Minister, “cleared the way” for his appointment...
“His successor, Theresa May had other ideas,” Lord Dyson says of the peerage proposals in A Judge’s Journey. “She did not like the idea of peerages being granted automatically to any group of people.”
Holders of high office in public life, such as judges, were traditionally ensured an automatic role in scrutinising legislation, until Mrs May sought to cut the size of Parliament’s upper house.
It is understood that, although the former Prime Minister was a stickler for propriety, she had taken umbrage with such honours being automatic. She [also] suggested last year older peers should “embrace retirement”...
Talk about first world problems and good for Ms May! Who promptly went back down in my estimation when I read on:
... but this week faced accusations of cronyism for appointing her chief of staff, Gavin Barwell, to the Lords in her resignation honours list.
Ah well.
The snub was said to have left the judge “disappointed”, as “to sit in the House of Lords would have been a fitting end to my journey from the Jewish community of Leeds”.
Double snowflake.
Why does he think it would be "fitting"?
WTF does his religion have to do with anything? Most of the Jewish people I knew in Leeds were relatively well off (not that I knew so many as to representative of all Jewish people in Leeds, to be fair).
I'm not aware that Jewish people particularly struggle to make it in the legal business, so it's not necessarily a triumph-in-the-face-of -adversity tale.
Debate Magazine
