Words, words, words.

One of the things which really gets up my nose is the sight, following a General Election, of the Prime-Minister-In-Waiting, whoever it might be, addressing us all and claiming that the result has given him and his party a "mandate" to pursue their manifesto policies - completely oblivious to the fact that they almost certainly have received significantly less than half of the votes cast. OK, no question they've won under our electoral rules, but a mandate? This came to mind yesterday when I listened to Lord Levy saying that the CPS decision not to bring any prosecutions in the "cash for honours" business had "exonerated" him. Really? The CPS statement says that they had decided that "...there is insufficient evidence to support proceedings against any individual...". Not, you will notice, no evidence, but insufficient evidence. So be relieved, be pleased, by all means, but exonerated?