These days, are par for the course. Normally, just rolling my eyes and moving on, I was very struck this time by the focus of the right-wards lurching demonstrated by the likes of Nadine Dorris and Bernard Jenkins focusing on gay marriage legislation and House of Lords Reform.
Both of these are the right thing to do.
To remove patronage in the make-up of the legislature; and lets be honest, it is patronage. Stephen Byers, Geoff Hoon and Patricia Hewitt secretly recorded suggesting they could be lobbied by the highest bidders and then using their positions within parliament to take forward lobbyist's concerns and being promptly told by Labour they would never get a peerage.
And gay marriage is nothing more and nothing less than full equality under the law for whoever you might fall in love with. The 1947 Marriage Act is a state definition of marriage. Religions can carry out their own variations within their ideology. The Catholics prohibits divorcees from marrying within the Church. Thats fine, thats up to them. But that is not the same as saying that that marriage is only for a man and a woman, which state is well within its right to legislate.
The New Statesman reports a Gallup poll showing 43% in favour of gay marriage.
PCS voted to take strike action over public sector pensions on a 61% majority on a 32.4% turnout.
The Conservatives polled 31% in the local elections on 3 May 2012 on a turnout of 32%.
Who here has the bigger mandate?
Lynne Featherstone is right when she says its not an either/or; that the coalition are more than capable of multitasking.
Thats the nature of coalition, it requires compromise. The Tories have yet to grasp this basic concept.
Compromises in a Coalition is the grown up version of "Show me yours and I'll show you mine."