The British constitution, much like a badly organised school sports day, has always valued tradition over efficiency. And among the most venerable traditions of our great nation is the appointment of people to the House of Lords not because they have led with honour, wisdom, or humility—but because, well, someone has to keep the red benches warm.

Enter Amanda Spielman.

Now, before the mob gathers outside Westminster with pitchforks and strongly worded tweets, let’s get one thing clear: this isn’t a defence of her career in education. That battlefield is already strewn with enough wreckage to keep every think tank and educational podcast busy for a decade. This is about whether she fits the House of Lords.

And on that front, she’s overqualified.

The real qualification for peerage in Britain isn’t a record of public service or the affection of your fellow citizens. No, it’s an uncanny ability to remain utterly convinced of your own brilliance while the world around you screams into a pillow. Amanda Spielman, if the allegations are to be believed, has that in spades.

The Lords, after all, is the spiritual home of people who mistake persistence for virtue and condescension for clarity. It is, historically, a safe haven for ex-ministers, failed advisors, family friends of Prime Ministers, tea-makers with initiative, and a handful of actual experts whom everyone mostly ignores unless they’re talking about horse racing.

To those who say she lacks educational experience: precisely! This puts her on par with many Lords who have commented on things they barely understand—like social media, or electricity. To those who say she ignored criticism and doubled down on disaster: a classic Westminster move. And to those who say she misunderstood safeguarding? That’s practically a rite of passage.

Remember, this is the chamber that once featured a hereditary peer who campaigned against climate change because he’d seen a warm summer once. It elevated Charlotte Owen for reasons that, to this day, remain classified under the Official Secrets Act and “vibes.”

Let’s not even mention Claire Fox, who got made a peer despite actively supported the slaughter of Brits.

So yes, Amanda Spielman should be raised to the peerage—not in spite of the controversy, but because of it. She is, in fact, the perfect fit. In a Lords packed with the underwhelming, the underqualified, and the undeniably posh, her appointment is a reassuring sign that absolutely nothing has changed.

Besides, there’s a great tradition in this country of rewarding failure with ermine. It’s practically what the robes are for.

And if, in future, the Lords wish to evolve into a chamber filled only with competence, vision, and integrity? Well… that really would be a radical and dangerous break with tradition.

Robert