If John Bercow does not overturn this ban, he will have failed his first real test as Speaker. And he will have encouraged the demise of democracy in this country.

But Bercow must have read my post - because he has overturned this ban. The Cubs may not be able to vote now, but they will do in the future. If they have a message that they want to get across to their elected representatives - after all, MPs are still their representatives, even if they cannot directly vote them in. Yet.

Bercow has shown that he does have a backbone and that he believes in demicracy. By allowing this demonstration, he is encouraging young people in this country to be politically active.

But lets not forget the reason the Cubs want to protest in the Commons in the first place: the threat to Scout Groups through the massive increase - it could triple in many cases - in water costs due to Ofwats decision to allow (and force) water companies to charge not just for the amount of water used but also for surface water run-off.

This could cripples Scout Groups across the country, and force many to close down or increase their subscription chages - estimates of the increase sugest that it may cost groups up to a quarter of their annual budget just to pay their water bill. Hardly the best use that money could go to.

Which annoys me is the fact that MPs are always saying how they want to listen to the “yoofs” - but whenever they have the chance, they never do so. Martin Slater hit the nail on the head when he said:

All constituents, regardless of age, should be free to lobby their MPs.

They should indeed. They may not be able to vote yet, but they will do in the future. If they have a message that they want to get across to their elected representatives - after all, MPs are still their representatives, even if they cannot directly vote them in. Yet.

The job of MPs is to listen to the people, whatever age they may be. And to encourage everyone to get involved in the political process. These Cubs want to get involved and make their voice heard. MPs should be enocuraging them, not denying them that chance.

If John Bercow does not overturn this ban, he will have failed his first real test as Speaker. And he will have encouraged the demise of democracy in this country.

I’m really not surprised he caught it - and rather more surprised that there have been no others from the film. After all, Leavesden Studios where the filming takes place is in Watford - which has been declared a swine flu hot spot.

The hysteria over swine flu is absurd. It’s a mild thing, really, and causes fewer deaths than the normal flu bug. For 99.9% of the population, swine flu could be no more than a “mild bout” - only those sith other complications are at serious risk, but that’s nothing new!

This is a very good move. Though Bercow wants to maintain the custom of speaking through the Chair (ie. him), which seems totally of out of date as well. Why can’t an MP refer to another as “you”? That would actually free up debate as least as much as removing the “honourbale member” reference.

But then, there’s another reason why MPs should no longer refer to each other as “honourable” - because a significant number of them simply aren’t. That has been revealed without doubt by the publication of the (unredacted) version of their expenses.

The sheer number of false or inappropriate claims is staggering - and since the amount repaid has breached the sum of £500,000, that’s one hell of a lot of money that should not have been paid in the first place. And many MPs are stabding down because of this. To refer to them as “honourbale members” is absurd, and definitely a misnomer - dishonourable members would be a more appropriate title.

The root of this is that Parliament needs to be updated. But updates should not be rushed, but brought in to facilitate the democratic process and develop over time. The removal of this archaic reference system that serves no purpose is a good start.

However, removing all of the “ceremonial” aspects would be a bad move - a bit of pomp and circumstance is good for us all. But it shouldn’t interfere in the running of our democracy.

contrary to UN Security Council resolutions.

It made me laugh.

What does North Korea care about the United Nations or any of its Security Council resolutions? It is not in the UN, and sanctions against it are already implemented. Nothing short of an invasion could really phase them - and the last time th UN tried an invasion, they lost (or at least didn’t win).

What is most amusing about the situation - even though North Korea having ballistic missiles is not itself amusing - is the fact that the UN takes itself and its own resolutions so seriously.

The UN is toothless. Its resolutions are ignored with impunity and no action - bar the occasional “economic sanction” being applied - is ever taken.

The very suggestion that the UN might be able to do anything - well, anything more than passing yet another resolution - about North Korea launching ballistic missiles is laughable.

This was - and is - opposed by the Conservatives and the Lib Dems at the time and since. But Labour MPs have now - more than two years after it was announced and more than a year after it come in to force - decided that they don’t like it after all.

Gordon Brown brought in the 10p tax soon after becoming Chancellor, and then abolished it in just before leaving the post. It was one of the few good things he did as Chancellor.

These 10p tax rebels are a long way behind the times. Since Brown abolished the tax rate, he has been elected as Labour leader and survived many backbench rebellions and coup attempts.

So it is more than slightly hypocritical for these Labour MPs to suddenly now be objecting to this tax on the poor.

The site provides easily accessible records of the UK Parliamentary process, and now contains data going back to 1935.

This gem is from Churchill commenting in 1939 on the result of the Munich Agreement made by Prime Minister Chamberlain in 1938. It is strangely relevant to our current overseas entanglements:

I should also like to praise the Government and the Secretary of State for the declaration that they have made that it is our duty to provide 19 Divisions from this country, apart from our Reserves in India and the Middle East, for general service overseas should the occasion require it. That is a momentous declaration. I have rarely heard anything so important stated in a Service Debate. Anyone can see the explanation. It is the first instalment of the bill for Munich. People say that we are not involved in the affairs of these remote countries, but afterwards it is found that they alter the whole life of the people of this country, their daily habits, their financial position, their trade, everything. This is the first instalment. I wish I could think it was the last instalment of this bill which has come in, but I am afraid that other drafts will be presented month after month and year after year through the greater part of our lifetime. It is a great pity that this statement was not made a year or two years ago.

Political anoraks are going to rub their hands in anticipation, and probably lose the entire weekend to anoractivities (sorry).

The site has also been redesigned, and Tom Steinberg the Director of MySociety has requested feedback about the new version:

Please give some constructive criticism on how it could be even better (please note, focussing on design here, we already have a load of feature priorities to deliver). The extension of coverage back to 1935 has involved the import of a large amount of data.

Each speech has a unique web address, and can be referenced individually in online articles. Annotation may also be left on the site by the public.

MySociety also provides a range of other websites designed to strengthen the democratic process. In April a version of TheyWorkForYou.com was launched to cover the Irish Dail at KildareStreet.com. Kildare Street is co-ordinated by John Handelaar, who reported that 9,000 people visited the site during the first month of its existence.

The site redesign was done by Richard Pope, and the import of the mass of data was overseen by Matthew Somerville.

I also have a piece on the Press Gazette site.

It’s our money, and we should be able to be properly informed in what it is actually being spent on. Getting that information at the moment is virtually impossible and actually understanding it completely beyond most of us (definitely for myself anyway).

I want to be able to see precisely what my money is spent on by my parish council, district council, county council, the government, and all other taxpayer funded services. Am I getting value for money? To be honest, I have no idea. And I cannot know until the new era of Google government is brought in by a Conservative government.

Don’t worry, I’m sure the British summer will soon end!