Initially, I was inclined to disagree with your editorial (23 January) which suggested that Vicky Pryce’s reappointment as governmental advisor was inappropriate.
If she had paid the penalty for her crime (which to me seemed hardly worse than those of MPs who apparently legally “flipped” their homes and commissioned duck moats in an effort to maximise their rewards), surely it would make sense to reappoint her to her government role.
Then I remembered that Pryce’s chum, Constance Briscoe, is still in court over allegations that she perverted the course of justice in the Pryce/Huhne case.
Already we have been presented with some colourful insights into that household, and more may emerge as the case against Briscoe continues. Perhaps it might have been diplomatic to wait until the case is over and for the press and media comments to die down – for Pryce’s sake as well as the government’s.
(Dr) Mary Brown