Ian Gibson resigned as Labour MP for Norwich North on June 5th, yet three weeks later and the writ is yet to be moved in the Commons to cause the by-election, which is now not expected to take place for another four weeks.
Meanwhile, Michael Martin resigned his Glasgow North East seat at the beginning of last week - having announced his intention to do so as long ago as May 19th. Yet there, too, no writ has been moved for a by-election.
Convention states that the departing MP's party gets to decide when to hold the contest, as it is a whip from that party who formally moves the writ for the by-election (and I gather that it would be the Labour whips in the case of the outgoing Speaker too).
But why should they?
Given that the idea of fixed term parliaments is now up for discussion, why not create a rule stating that a by-election automatically happens a fixed time after the vacancy occurs - say, five or six Thursdays later (perhaps allowing for extra grace over Christmas or holiday periods)?
That would leave ample time for a funeral (in the case of an MP's death) and selection meetings before a standard length campaign - and ensure that a constituency is not left unrepresented in Parliament for weeks or even months on end.
As far as I can tell, the only reason the voters of the above two constituencies are without representation in Parliament right now is because of Labour Party tactical games as to which timing will suit it best.
Certainly I hear mutterings that Labour wants the contests to be fought on separate days - possibly with Norwich in July and Glasgow as far in the future as September - in order that its limited machine doesn't have to be stretched into fighting on two fronts at the same time.
