I’m getting the hang of this prophecy thing. 
As I suggested a week ago, the role of the Attorney General is to be reviewed, and the Attorney General has said she will not be the person who decides on the cash for honours potential prosecution, or indeed major criminal prosecutions.
While I’m on the theme, what better allegory for the blogger than the Cumaean Sibyl, sitting at the mouth of her cave, writing her wisdom and prophecy on oak leaves, soon to be blown away by the wind, if not read straight away?
Dear Sybil
Any thoughts on the 3.30 at Doncaster (the Underwater Stakes)?
More to the point, the Attorney-General’s announcement is certainly a good start, but it will be interesting to see to what extent the promised review of the A-G’s role will encompass a third conflict which you did not mention in your blog a week ago, namely the potential conflict between the A-G’s role as both government legal adviser and a member of that same government. This problem was also highlighted by Lord Goldsmith’s unconvincing account of the changes to his advice on the legality of the Iraq war in the two opinions he delivered on that question in March 2003. The independence of legal advice is a basic ethical premise on which the profession is built(in theory at least). It is unfortunate to say the least that the role of the ex officio head of the independent Bar is constructed so as to bring that very independence into question.