In my post a little earlier, I pointed out how the Government failed to include any of the legislative measures recommended by the Kelly Report in the Queen's Speech.
One such measure was the banning of MPs sitting concurrently in devolved legislatures.
And it got me thinking. Who stands to lose most from such a ban? There are currently seventeen MPs with a dual mandate. One of those is in Scotland: Alex Salmond, who is standing down from the Commons at the general election to concentrate on his duties in the Scottish Parliament.
The other sixteen are in Northern Ireland: all nine DUP MPs, all five Sinn Fein MPs and two of the three SDLP MPs.
Now, David Cameron and Owen Paterson have made clear that all the MPs elected under the Conservative/UlsterUnionist banner in Northenr Ireland will be expected to be full-time Westminster MPs after the general election.
But were the MPs from the other Northern Irish parties hoping to continue as part-timers (but getting an additional chunk of salary and allowances, of course)? And was the decision of Gordon Brown not to include this measure in the Queen's Speech a sop to them perchance?
It wouldn't be the first time that a crackdown on the way we do politics didn't extend across the Irish Sea - the legislation on registration of donations to political parties still does not extend to Northern Ireland.
Just a thought.
