Ben Brogan briefed by unknown Downing Street source that Coulson

“… is viewed as one of the three most successful occupants of that post, the other two being Bernard Ingham and Alastair Campbell. If you want a measure of the esteem in which he is held by Dave and his Team, it is to hear them elevate Mr Coulson to membership of a trio with the other two recent big beasts to hold that role. He is considered, frankly, irreplaceable, even if those around him must know that no one is. His departure, they fear, would be a crushing blow to the work of the government at a critical time.”

Guido was the first to report the rumour that Mandy is eyeing up some sort of role with Lazards and according to the FT the investment bank has not denied the speculation. Still one good turn deserves another – Lazards advised Kraft about their controversial buying of Cadbury, something the government didn’t block…

Guess who was the Business Secretary at the time…

Guido noticed the less than subtle use by Labour since the new year of the term “Tory-led government” in every media hit or speech, but he didn’t realise Miliband’s bad-boy spinner Tom Baldwin was quite so brazen in his attempts to sign the media up to the theme. This went out to all the media:

As you may have noticed, we have changed our language in recent weeks to avoid describing the Government as a coalition or a partnership of equals. We believe a more accurate description is that this is a Conservative-led government. I understand that the phrase a “Tory-led government” is two words too long to be repeated on every occasion. But I also think that you are making a choice whenever you call it “the coalition”. When we were in power, no one was left in any doubt that our most unpopular decisions were those of a “Labour government”.

The word “Coalition” is one that avoids party labels while also suggesting a degree of inter-party harmony and co-operation which is, day-by-day and split-by-split, being shown as false. Unless Nick Boles gets his way, “the Coalition” will not be standing for election.

Can I suggest you at least vary your description of this Tory-led government. On some occasions, you might call it a Conservative-Liberal Democrat government. On others it might be just “the government”.

When you are talking about this government in a political context, I think it would be fairer to refer to it by reference to party labels.

With best wishes, Tom Baldwin,
Director of Strategy and Communications

Guido got thinking, given that Baldwin is constantly referred to as “the former Times journalist”, despite the fact he was on the way out anyway rather than being poached, perhaps there should be a redesignation of how he is described:

That should do it…

Labour rent-a-quote Lisa Nandy MP is fast becoming a blog favourite. The member for Wigan has found herself facing an onslaught of questions from the Tories concerning her staffer, Lisa Johnson, who is a political officer for the militant hard left University and Colleges Union. The problem for Nandy is the fact she is on the Education Select Committee and therefore her staffer is highly likely to be privy to information about legislation that she can pass back to her other employer. Just imagine if it was an oil company and the Energy Select Committee…

Tory MP Gavin Williamson has sent an exhaustive list of questions concerning:

• Whether any parliamentary expenses are being used to pay a union official to carry out union work.
• Whether the UCU is being given special access to confidential information reserved for members of the Education Select Committee.
• Whether parliamentary mechanisms, such as written questions and select committee proceedings, are being used to promote the UCU’s agenda.
• Whether the substantial number of UCU officials who have backed violent and illegal forms of protest now have a direct line to parliament.

Given the UCU are organising riots outside Parliament, how does Nandy feel it’s appropriate to have an organiser inside in such a sensitive position?

It’s a tough life being the New Statesman’s “voice of a generation”, but luckily Laurie Penny – our  favourite privately educated revolutionary who learnt about the hard knocks of life at Wadham College, Oxford – has found the solution to all her problems. Hire some help. She is advertising for an intern to help her with a book, which due to media demands she doesn’t have time to commit to herself. If only she spent more time typing instead of rioting…

The job is to “find statistics and quotes and case studies, talk over what I’m writing and hunt down sources and stories for me, and keep meticulous notes of all sources in academic format.” For this the lowly researcher will be paid the grand sum of £500 for 85 hours work. As a fearless left-wing campaigner for higher living standards for the workers surely Laurie must know that £5.88 per hour is short of the minimum wage and far from the “living wage” she publicly supports (£7.85). Apparently the job would  “suit someone who is currently out of work, working part-time, or parenting”. What planet is she on that she thinks parents can afford childcare on £5.88 per hour?

Even more controversial than the flouting of minimum wage legislation is her contempt for sexual equality legislation. She clearly states: “I’m probably looking for a female researcher”. The EHRC clearly says: “Stating a preference for a man or woman in a job advertisement is unlawful sex discrimination unless the requirements of the particular job mean that it is lawful to employ only a man or a woman”. Form an orderly queue…

UPDATE : Should point out for the sake of completeness that Penny’s practical understanding of unpaid internships was cushioned by the fact that she was lucky enough to have an inheritance to rely on when she was starting out in the media. Not everyone has that advantage…

Lord Taylor’s claims were connected to a residence in Oxford – an address the prosecution say he never stayed at and doesn’t own. This is conceded by his barrister who says John Taylor was told by another senior peer that his claims were ‘acceptable’. His defence amounts to “a big boy told me to do it” and “all the other kids do it”. His barrister said peers, including Taylor, treat expenses as “in lieu of a salary” and that falsely claiming for expenses like this was ‘commonplace’ in the Lords. They were all at it.

You might think that admitting falsely claiming for expenses was a clear admission of guilt. It seems that the defence is trying to show there was no mens rea or “guilty mind” without which they could argue there is no criminal liability because actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea – “the act does not make a person guilty unless the mind be also guilty”. How Taylor will demonstrate an innocent mind when he gave false addresses will be interesting…

Many Peers barely make it through an afternoon session in the Lords, but somehow they have managed to pull an all-nighter to debate a mere three of a possible two hundred amendments put forward to the Bill that must be passed by Friday if the AV referendum can take place on the 5th May.

However it is the coalition’s rebalancing of seats, to make them of equal size, that Labour is finding hard to swallow. Days like this that highlight just how flawed our constitution is – we have unelected and unaccountable peers breaking convention in order to block a move that will make our representative democracy fairer and more balanced. You couldn’t make it up…

UPDATE: The FT’s Jim Pickard highlights why Labour’s claim that they are not filibustering out of party interest looks ridiculous:

Lord Harris of Haringey, Lab, 01.45:

“So what were the reasons for choosing 600 (MPs) as opposed to 650, 630, 575 or 585? I was tempted to say that there was some sort of arcane numerology about this. Noble Lords will be aware that 650 is the product of three prime numbers: two, five squared and 13; 630 is of course the product of four prime numbers: two, three squared, five and seven. I defy anyone to find a similar formulation or number that involves five prime numbers. Maybe my noble friend Lord Winston, or some such person could come up with something.”