I see Tony Blair's former chief of staff was upset by the police investigation of the "cash for honours" allegations:
Powell saw the cash-for-honours investigation as part of a disturbing trend towards the police becoming too involved in politics. "If someone's broken the law and really done a criminal act, felony or embezzlement, it should be dealt with as a criminal issue, absolutely. But because the Scots Nats complain about something, is that a sensible reason for the police to get involved?"
Now, who was it who popularised the slogan "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime"? In all the incontinent torrent of criminal justice legislation from Blair's government (if the word kanonorrhea doesn't exist it would need to be invented), I don't recall one that said the police should decide an allegation of crime isn't worth investigating on the basis of the political opinions of the people making the allegation, let alone the number of votes they've attracted. Of course, the possibility of malice is something to be borne in mind as part of the investigation, not as a reason for not even attempting to investigate in the first place.
But then, what can you expect from people who don't seem to question the reliability of "allies" who threaten to turn against us if they're not allowed to use orders for our planes as a way of robbing their own national treasury?
Still never mind, it's spring. Here's an ornamental cherry tree near where I live. And for the first time in months, I'm walking about without a sweater on.