A FORTNIGHT ago, I expressed relief that the general election campaign was over (it's only three weeks since the results were announced - but already it seems like last year).

On returning to Parliament last week, I noticed a few colleagues hobbling and a number appeared to have lost a bit of weight.

But, in one part of England, the general election is not over. Sadly, one of the candidates in South Staffordshire died during the campaign and, under the rules, voting will take place on June 23.

I will shortly be on a train to Wolverhampton, to knock on some doors, to finally quench the appetite for electioneering before my recently-honed campaigning skills decay.

It is perhaps surprising that there have not been more such postponements - the last time this happened in a general election was in 1951.

Fighting an election campaign for four weeks is a stressful business, often conducted by those no longer in their prime. One candidate in Yorkshire was 91, but he emerged at the end in better shape than some of his younger opponents.

And the consequences of these postponed elections could be serious.

Had a candidate in Sedgefield - where there were many candidates - died during the campaign, the Prime Minister would not have been able to speak in last week's debate on the Queen's Speech.

Perhaps we should look again at these rules, which were drawn up in calmer times.

We now live in an age where people are prepared to die for their beliefs. What is to stop a fundamentalist getting nominated for a high-profile Parliamentary seat, and then committing suicide before polling day?

Indeed, what is to stop 649 of them standing in each seat in the UK and doing just that?

Perhaps we should do what they do in the United States - carry on with the election and, if the candidate who wins has died, simply have a by-election.

www.sirgeorgeyoung.org.uk