We haven't been able to take payment
You must update your payment details via My Account or by clicking update payment details to keep your subscription.
Act now to keep your subscription
We've tried to contact you several times as we haven't been able to take payment. You must update your payment details via My Account or by clicking update payment details to keep your subscription.
Your subscription is due to terminate
We've tried to contact you several times as we haven't been able to take payment. You must update your payment details via My Account, otherwise your subscription will terminate.

Final word: The apper chamber

While the country pondered baser things, their lordships were considering whether hand-held devices be allowed in the chamber

The House of Lords prides itself on a lofty approach to debate, far above the hurly-burly of the daily news agenda. So while the rest of the country was wondering whether Prince Andrew could hold out against rebel forces last week, their lordships were considering a rather more arcane question: should hand-held devices be allowed in the chamber? Come to think of it, what is a handheld device? Is it, for example, the sort of thing that racier elements of the House might use to contact their bookmaker or play Scrabble during debates? We are not making this up, by the way: both Scrabble and bookmakers were mentioned during the debate. In the end the Lords decided to allow such devices, as long as they didn’t click (which might wake up the bishops).

Be warned. Just last month an MP was photographed ogling escort girls on his iPad during a vote in the Italian parliament. If one of the older members of the House were unexpectedly to catch sight of female flesh on his handheld device, who would answer for the consequences?