I think I may have been a little too dismissive or understated in my last post, as the expenses row has now mutated into a full-blown political conversation about constitutional reform, elections and even 'revolution'. Precedents from the past have been sought - the Norway Debate, the Civil Wars ('In the name of God, go!'), and obscure cases of City sleaze from 1695 - and on this morning's Today programme one sensed the political parties also had their eye on a soon to be redrawn future. No-one has mentioned the Self-Denying Ordinance yet, as far as I know, either from the Civil Wars or the transition between the Constituent and Legislative Assemblies in the French Revolution (1791). You read it here first.
This said, I still think this is a matter that is consuming the political classes rather than the rest of us. Everyone else is quietly satisfied that their views of politicians matched their assumption that The New Statesman got it about right. But match all this with the backdrop of the financial crisis, and suddenly the notion that history was 'then' (and safely explored, say, in exhibitions at national institutions), and that things will tick along as they are, seems less a safe bet than it did a few months ago.
Comments