What is this “they were party peerages” defence? That is not a legal defence, it is an explanation. Financing Cherie’s haircut is not grounds for a peerage. Some of the donors/lenders had no party affiliation and had in fact given money in the past to the Tories. They were never going to be Labour working peers.

If they were generously supporting the Labour party why did they make “commercial loans” for presumably commercial profit? If they were not really loans for profit, but loans intended to be turned into donations, that is illegal. There are too many holes in the story being handed out by Tom Kelly.

As for all those clucking, “see it is going nowhere”, shall we see? They did say he would not be questioned. Guido will grant that he did report that Blair would be questioned under caution, and Blair hasn’t been cautioned today.

It is not much to be proud of is it? The best Blairites can claim is that the PM was not arrested or cautioned, merely “helping police with their inquiries”.