I cannot share the outrage among my fellow Liberal Democrats at the questioning of Ed Davey over his actions as the minister responsible for the Post Office
Those actions are bound to be of interest to the media. Ed is a party leader and one of the few ministers to have held that role in the relevant period who is still at the forefront of politics.
If you doubt that, read the names of the others: Ian McCartney, Alan Johnson, Douglas Alexander, Stephen Timms, Gerry Sutcliffe, Jim Fitzpatrick, Pat McFadden, Lord Young, Norman Lamb, Jo Swinson, Jenny Willott, Jo Baroness Nevill-Rolfe, Margot James, Andrew Griffiths, Kelly Tolhurst, Paul Scully, Jane Hunt, Dean Russell, Kevin Holinrake.
I wonder how many of them you would recognise if they sat down next to you on the bus. So Ed is bound to be of interest to journalists reporting the Horizon scandal.
Nor do I understand the determination that Ed should not apologise for his failure to challenge the Post Office's story.
While doing so he could fairly point out he was the first minister to meet campaigners and that until a whistleblower from Fujitsu appeared on Panorama in August 2015, there was no hard evidence with which to challenge the Post Office's account. By then the Coalition was over, so the journalists need to talk to the Conservatives if they want to find out why nothing was done then.
No doubt Ed and the people around him could put it better than that, but I fear his current defensiveness is not serving him well.
Some fear the headline "Ed Davey Apologises", reasoning the media will come back for more. But I suspect the headline "Ed Davey Refuses to Apologise" has been more harmful.
If we want something to say on Horizon beyond a defence of our leader's actions, I suggest we think about what Andy Burnham has been saying about the "unelected state" and read the Andrew Rawnsley article in the Observer tomorrow: 'The abuse of unaccountable power is at the wicked heart of the Post Office scandal.'

