Morning:
10°c
MPs go off on their three-month summer break today knowing that their standing in the public estimation is, after the expenses scandal, lower than it has been for as long as anyone can remember.
Public esteem is unlikely to have been augmented by the measures to reform the expenses and allowances system rushed through the Commons for its final reading yesterday.
The Tory MP Sir Patrick Cormack complained that the reform bill was given barely a couple of hours' debate; he was right. Legislate in haste, repent at leisure, is a useful maxim.
Given that a full inquiry by Sir Christopher Kelly is to be published in October, not long after MPs return from the recess, it is hard to see why the Government feels obliged to anticipate his recommendations before MPs go on holiday.
The crucial element of any reform is that it gives transparency to expenses claims: the new system would oblige MPs to indicate whether they were switching their designated second homes. That might make them think twice about flipping.
There will be a new, independent expenses body that will monitor MPs' claims and instruct them to repay allowances where necessary.
It would be preferable, of course, if MPs could be trusted to make only legitimate claims but that seems over-optimistic.
A measure that would have banned paid advocacy by MPs was withdrawn, which seems retrograde.
But it is hard to think what the Government was doing when it attempted, and failed, to curb parliamentary privilege, whereby MPs will not face prosecution for anything they say in the Commons - a valuable protection for free speech.
The Lords, which had its own share of scandal, has ensured that none of the measures will apply to it.
These new rules seem like an inadequate substitute for radical simplification of the entire system.
If MPs were paid slightly more, with greater remuneration for those outside London, the complexities of the allowances system could be done away with altogether.
The Government should have waited for Sir Christopher Kelly's report before cobbling together this hasty Act.
Tackling trouble
It comes as little surprise to learn that the times when there is most likely to be trouble - drunkenness and violence - on the streets is between midnight and 3am on Friday and Saturday nights, followed by the three hours before midnight on the same nights.
Ministers are now launching a campaign to reduce the deaths and injuries that occur at these times in particularly troublesome areas, and besides the West End, these include violent places such as Croydon and Camden.
Marshals will monitor taxi and bus queues, to reduce quarrels about queue-jumping and jostling. There will, crucially, be high-visibility policing, including sniffer dogs, in stations and other places where young people congregate.
And there will be restrictions on the licensing conditions on some fast-food outlets, which may limit the number of customers allowed on their premises at a time.
These measures paint a dispiriting picture of London at weekends, where alcohol and drug abuse fuels violence among young men, but they are a realistic response to the violence inflicted on and by 13- to 24-year-olds.
Government initiatives like these have mixed records - last year's anti-knife action programme has coincided with an increase in the number of actual stabbings but a reduction in violent offences overall.
This new campaign would carry even more weight if it were accompanied by a Government rethink of the liberalised licensing laws.
Electrifying
The Great Western railway line between London and Cardiff is to be electrified over the next decade, bringing faster journeys and cleaner trains.
This is creditable, long-term thinking. It shows that even in hard economic times, long-term investment in our infrastructure is still possible and necessary.
