Yesterday I went to the most extraordinary Queen's speech debate in my short time as an MP. 

First the extraordinary spectacle of the Speaker blaming the police and his own Serjeant at Arms for allowing Damian Green's offices to be searched. Apparently it was anyone but his fault that the Commons authorities had allowed an MP's offices to be searched without a warrant - for an offence that appeared to be no more than an MP going about his normal business. Nothing better sums up the powerlessness and feebleness of parliament to hold the executive to account in our flawed constitution.

But if the Speaker dodged the issue, that was nothing compared to Gordon Brown's performance in the debate that followed. He would not say if he agreed with the Speaker that the police should have had a warrant (following Michael Howard's brilliant intervention). He would not accept any responsibility for our current economic crisis or his role in stoking up the debt by proclaiming an "end" to boom and bust. Like a conjuror showing a trick we have all seen a million times before, he spent the majority of his time not defending his policies but attacking the opposition in a vain attempt to create fake "dividing lines." 

This was a Prime Minister focused not on the economy but his own survival. More's the tragedy for those who will lose their homes and businesses as a result.

What is striking about the Damian Green affair is how much doesn't add up. Why would the police inform in advance the Speaker, David Cameron and Boris Johnson but not their ministerial masters? Given that Jacqui Smith explicitly denied the arrest took place because of leaks, what precisely is the criminal offence Damian Green is alleged to have committed? Why was the operation sanctioned by the Met's anti-terrorism chief and why were 11 anti-terrorism police used? Why did the Speaker appear not to stand up for the freedom of members of parliament to hold the government to account? Most of all, given the profound implications for our democracy why has the Prime Minister uttered not a squeak?

Something has gone badly wrong. In the end what the police do is the responsibility of elected ministers. For counter-terrorism police to arrest an opposition politician doing his job sends a chill down the spine of everyone except Robert Mugabe and his henchmen. They are no doubt crowing with delight. If the Mother of Parliaments can't protect the rights of its members, who on earth can?

I have just blogged on Centre Right the real story of this afternoon's pre-budget report. New Labour RIP and a longer, deeper recession sadly.

Just back from a weekend in Paris.

To be Minister of Culture in France is to be considerably higher up the pecking order than our DCMS Secretary of State. The first Minister of Culture in France was Andre Malraux, who modestly declared "I am France" and opened cultural centres he called "cathedrals of the twentieth century." Can't really imagine Andy Burnham pulling that off - nor me for that matter. Quiet understatement is the order of the day in the UK if you are to avoid relegation to pseud's corner.

Malraux got the job in 1960, considerably earlier than David Mellor became the UK's first ever "Minister for Fun" in 1992. His love of leaving monuments has been a constant theme in France. Mitterrand's one was the Pyramide at the Louvre, which I visited this morning. It is perhaps the most spectacular example in the world of the old and new working in harmony together.

Interestingly Simon Jenkins, the new National Trust Chairman, has said he wants to make peace with modern architects. I hope he realises it is not the juxtaposition of old and new that people object to, but the quality of the new. There is a world of difference between buildings like the Gherkin or the London Eye that enhance their surroundings and 1960s carbuncles like Centre Point or New Zealand House which diminish them.

One thing I particularly liked in the Louvre was the high ceilings. We have learnt that - finally - in Terminal 5 and the new St Pancras where the roof has been magnificently restored, no doubt partly to send a gentle message to French tourists arriving on Eurostar. We can do it too, mes amis.

You know the government is running out of things to say when they come up with a ridiculous proposal like this one – apparently schools are to be charged £50 if they compost waste.  Under the Defra proposal, schools and other community groups will actually have to apply to be exempted from the new waste management regulations.

Many schools in my constituency take pride in trying to be eco-friendly and teaching their pupils the value of disposing waste in a way that helps the environment and are rightly dismayed at this proposed measure.  This is another bizarre example of the government encouraging schools to take up a new initiative with one hand, and putting obstacles and bureaucracy in the way with the other.

Thanks to the parents of Folly Hill Infant School in Farnham for drawing this plan to my attention – they've even started a campaign against the charges.