A Lord Spiritual, not in the House I am not an atheist or a rabid religion basher like our good friend Dr Dawkins. In fact, like Martin Rees I am very fond of the Church of England. But I am afraid I wholeheartedly disagree with the idea, apparently supported by all the main political parties, that the reformed House of Lords should retain a built-in set of bishops. The main argument seem to be that there have always been 'Lords Spiritual', ever since the House of Lords was founded over 700 years ago. So what? Until it was banned there had always been dog fighting and bear baiting. Tradition is only a useful argument when it has some bearing on morale or makes a good profit, which hardly seems to be the case here. It's not that I think bishops should be excluded from the House. I'd be happy to see them there. I just don't think they should have reserved places, they should be elected (or whatever the mechanism) like everyone else. If they are to stay, I thin...

I gather there may be a debate in parliament on the restoration of the death penalty. That's fine, but those demanding the restoration should consider the logical consequences. In the event that someone is put to death but is subsequently found to be innocent, they will have been murdered. This is likely to happen - it certainly happened on a regular basis before the abolition. When such a murder ensues, those responsible MUST, I believe, themselves be tried for murder and executed. It's only fair. It's not just the person who pulls the trigger who is sentenced. I would suggest that those responsible, who should then be executed, are: The executioner The prison governor The Home Secretary (who could issue a pardon) All MPs who voted for the restoration of the death penalty All citizens who signed a petition requiring the restoration of the death penalty So it's fine. Demand the restoration of the death penalty - but only if you are prepared to live (and die)...

Do our Members of Parliament get on-the-job training? I hope so. After all, these people were, until the election, doing perfectly ordinary jobs, then all of a sudden they are making decisions about foreign policy or education or science. I'm afraid it's not enough that 'common sense' prevails - because common sense is often demonstrably wrong. So what's the alternative? If there isn't already, I think there should be compulsorary training, perhaps one day a week during the parliamentary term, and full time during parliamentary recesses. (We'll allow them 25 days annual leave.) This could cover a wide range of foundation topics, but obviously anyone getting a departmental post (however junior) should have a crash course in the appropriate subject. Perhaps then if an MP tried to drum up support for (say) public funding of homeopathy, or demonstrably didn't understand the mechanisms of nuclear fusion and fission as applied to future power plants they c...