Uk politics

The Lord Rennard scandal is spreading, not least because of Nick Clegg's willingness to bring in other characters. He even directly named Danny Alexander as central to the disastrous investigation five years ago. Clegg's statement says they didn't know the specifics involved or the names of the women. A line that does not hold much weight when one of the victims was his own Special Advisor. As many Liberal Democrats lie low, it would not be a 'show trial' without everyone's favourite yellow clown. Enter stage left Lembit Opik who popped on Sky News. The last person that the party leadership would want to see, and he did not upset the punters: 'I don't want to hear all the emotion from Clegg, I don't want to hear how angry he is.

Nick Clegg’s statement this evening concedes that he was aware of general concerns about Lord Rennard’s alleged behaviour. He says that he asked his then chief of staff Danny Alexander to confront Rennard about these concerns in 2008. Rennard told Alexander, Clegg says, that there was no truth to the allegations. Again, it is worth stressing that Rennard denies all the complaints made against him. Clegg, though, angrily refutes suggestions that he was aware of any specific allegations. He complains about a ‘show trial of innuendo, half-truths and slurs’ against the Liberal Democrats. Following Clegg’s statement, most attention now will focus on the Alexander Rennard meeting in 2008. Was it formal or informal? Were other party officials present?

Statement from Nick Clegg: The allegations made on Channel 4 concerning Lord Rennard last Thursday were extremely serious and distressing to the women involved. It is critical they are investigated thoroughly and dealt with properly and they will be. But I would like to make one thing crystal clear. I did not know about these allegations until Channel 4 informed the party of them shortly before they were broadcast. I have today spoken to one of the women in the broadcast who I respect and admire and who confirmed that she had never raised the issue with me. I am angry and outraged at the suggestion that I would not have acted if these allegations had been put to me.

Like John Rentoul, I think much of the scoffing and chortling at the expense of the poor jury asked to consider Vicky Pryce's guilt (or innocence!) is misplaced. This was an unusual case. The questions* they asked - which have been much mocked - seem entirely reasonable to me. More than that, they're quite intelligent. "Reasonable doubt" for instance is not necessarily an obvious thing to measure or define. As for their conduct demonstrating that the Great British public is incapable of jury service, well, phooey to that. In any case, in both the legal systems that apply on these islands, the vast majority of trials do not involve juries at all. We do not actually believe juries are necessarily necessary for criminal proceedings.

All the evidence is pointing to a Lib Dem win in Eastleigh, but those Tories visiting are continuing to fight to the bitter end. Eric Pickles was down there today, and wasted no time at all in sinking his teeth into his Coalition partners. The Communities Secretary said: 'The Lib Dems are taking the people of Eastleigh for a ride. Their homes tax would hit hardworking families hardest – with ordinary people running the risk of seeing a £320 hike in their council tax. The Lib Dem candidate doesn’t understand that his new tax could not be introduced without a costly general revaluation of council tax bands. When Labour did this in Wales, four times as many homes moved up one or more council tax bands as moved down.