Searching through a 1942 edition of the Manchester Guardian (now theguardian), I came across this letter dated October 2nd of that year. It’s from a J. L. Edwards of Whitefield.

It is to be hoped that members of the House of Commons will avail themselves to the full of the opportunity offered by the Home Secretary when he moved the second reading of the Prolongation of Parliament Bill. He then repeated the pledge already given by the Government that before a general election could be held facilities would be given for the discussion of the electoral system, so that there might be proper consideration of suggested reforms.

That our electoral system is far from perfect is acknowledged by members of all parties. It may be argued that the question of structure of the post-war Parliament is at present only of academic interest, but many will fear lest, by shelving the matter, we find ourselves unprepared for the serious problems which will arise at the end of the war. Consideration of the working of our electoral system is surely a matter of the first importance.

The War Cabinet’s plan for India, which was presented to the leaders of Indian opinion by Sir Stafford Cripps in March of this year, provided for the election of the Constitution-making body by the system of Proportional Representation. This recognition by the Government of the practicality of Proportional Representation raises the question whether this method should be applied in the election of the House of Commons, and makes all the more important an early consideration by Parliament of the defects of our own electoral system. The most suitable machinery for examining the problem would appear to be a Speaker’s Conference, on the lines of the one appointed during the last war.

The more things change, the more they stay the same. Anyone know if the pledge for “discussion of the electoral system” was fulfilled?

I was very pleased to see this morning that Vince Cable, the Liberal Democrats’ Acting Leader, is to boycott the state visit of Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah – a move described in The Herald as unprecedented (“It is highly unusual for a leader of an opposition party to snub a royal visit. Foreign Office officials could not immediately recall any precedent”).

One of the perks of being a party leader is getting to go to state banquets and the like, and with only two months in charge of the party, Vince is unlikely to have many opportunities, which makes his gesture all the more significant.

Taking a stand for human rights and against corruption is absolutely what the Liberal Democrats are for – and the dismissive response of Liam Fox shows why the Tories, despite all their pleas, aren’t about to attract the liberal vote. It was, after all, the Conservatives who oversaw the Al Yamamah arms deal with Saudia Arabia in the 1980s.

Another opportunity for me to risk someone pointing out where I’ve managed to do the same on a website I run, but this is too tempting not to blog.

So I was recently browsing the website of Croydon Central MP Andrew Pelling (who is currently suspended from the Tory party). My favourite part was this:

A week or so later, I’ve popped back, but the section doesn’t appear to have changed. Does no one have a kind word to say about Andrew?

One thing GB has inadvertently demonstrated over the last few weeks is the farcical nature of calling general elections by prime ministerial fiat. Local government has fixed terms; the Scottish Parliament and Welsh and London Assemblies have fixed terms; legislatures in other countries have fixed terms. It’s about time we had fixed-term parliaments at Westminster, and that’s the policy the LibDems backed at our conference Brighton in September.

Hurrah, then, for David Howarth MP, our Shadow Solicitor General. When the House of Commons returns from recess tomorrow, David will table a Fixed Term Parliaments Bill.

All of which is a convenient excuse to plug this video, which raises a chuckle every time I watch it: