Real reform

Few subjects animate the polenta- eating classes more than constitutional reform: tinkering with institutions excites the bien-pensant mind in the way that train sets excite ten-year-old boys. So it is no surprise that the expenses scandal triggered a fresh flurry of demands for wholesale upheaval of the political system and — in particular — proportional representation.

It was always unclear why anyone would think that PR, a system that weakens the constituency link and empowers the party bosses who control the candidate lists, would ever reduce corruption. In search of better judgment, The Spectator consulted its readers on the sorts of reforms that might improve the system and then submitted their recommendations to a PoliticsHome opinion poll.

The findings, disclosed by Fraser Nelson on pp 20-21, are both simple and refreshing. Parliament needs stronger, more independent committees to hold the executive to account, fixed terms to prevent Brown-style dithering over the election date, and mechanisms to remove immediately MPs found guilty of misdemeanours. There is no taste whatsoever for complex, grandiose changes to the system. What the voters want is absolutely straightforward and absolutely right: that MPs play by the same rules as the rest of us.