Resign, Janner

There is a new rule in the House of Lords, according to Michael Ashcroft. Because of the enormous and embarrassing size of the membership of the Lords, the House of Lords Reform Act 2014 states that if a peer is unable to take an active role in the work of the House, he or she should resign.

Ashcroft has indicated that he will do this. 

As far as I understand the person is allowed to retain their title and but ceases to be allowed to take part in the proceedings of the chamber or to collect the tax free salary paid to participants ...some £300 a day plus expenses.

Greville Janner is apparently, as a result of dementia, too ill to answer serious charges relating to sexual matters with under-age boys. He has to the best of my knowledge not resigned from the House of Lords. 

Surely if you are too ill to face charges under the law of the land, you should also be considered too ill to be making laws of the land.

Mr Janner should resign immediately.
******

Marco Biagi was interviewed by Jim Naughtie on the Today Programme this morning. He explained that, despite all the BBC journalists talking about Ed refusing a coalition with the SNP (the SNP having already ruled out any such thing), that what Nicola had been suggesting, offering to Ed last night on live UK-wide TV, was an opportunity to get rid of David Cameron and bring in more progressive politics. A co-operation rather than anything formal like a coalition.

Naughtie did his job asking Marco fair and reasonable questions and Marco did a good job of answering them failrly and reasonably. Naughtie brought up the argument that, during the minority Scottish government of 2007-11, Alex Salmond's government had worked with Annabel Goldie's Tories. Marco was able to explain clearly that that was what minority governments had to do. He pointed out that they worked with the other parties too. Minority government is impossible otherwise.

It seemed a decent interview, from both parties' points of view.

Then Naughtie interviewed Margaret Curran. He put to her the simple question that Nicola had asked Miliband last night. Would Miliband walk away from the SNP and let Cameron from another government, if the figures worked out like that? She didn't answer it, of course. She said that she was working for her constituents for a Labour majority government. He tried again and pointed out that, with respect, she had not answered his question. Again she rambled about her constituents (for whom she now seems to have the greatest concern). She wanted, as they wanted, she said, a Labour government with a majority.

Naughtie tried again to get her to answer. She didn't. She said that she had been in Scottish politics for a long time and she knew Nicola Sturgeon, who had never had a good word to say about Labour. But she would not answer what the Labour party would do if NOT working with the SNP meant that  Tory or Tory-Liberal and possibly Ukip government were the alternative.

It's a big thing, I know, for a party to concede that it may not win a full on majority, and I can't honestly blame Labour for being unwilling to contemplate losing, but when the polls have shown that it is a likelihood, not just over a couple of weeks, but over months and months, is it not time to be letting people know that you have thought the unthinkable.

Sometimes in office you will have to do this. Perhaps it would be wise to show the electorate that you have a back-up plan.

**********