Corruption

Tom Watson fired a barb at David Cameron during the oral questions following the prime minister’s statement. He referred to a letter about allegations against Andy Coulson he had sent to Cameron on 4th October 2010. The letter had gone unanswered and Watson wanted to know why. After struggling to answer for a while, Cameron eventually said he would respond, forgetting that he appears already to have done so. Here is his letter, just released by Downing Street: '1O DOWNING STREET LONDON SW1A 2AA 20 October 2010 Mr Tom Watson MP Thank you for your letter of 4 October. The Standards and Privileges Committee and the Home Affairs Committee have both announced inquiries. The Home Secretary has made an oral statement to the House.

As Theresa May put it in an impressive statement to the House earlier, “These allegations are not, unfortunately, the only recent example of alleged corruption and nepotism in the police.” She then vowed to open an inquiry into these matters, which will stand in addition to the two already announced by the government. The panel will have plenty to look at, as Michael White explained in the Spectator a few years back. John Yates has previous, by Michael White, 10 March 2007 When I was a young reporter on the London Evening Standard nearly 40 years ago I spent a lot of time in the press room at Scotland Yard, not learning very much.

The news that the votes which ended up with Russia and Qatar winning the rights to host the 2018 and 2022 World Cups might not have been model, clean elections is about as surprising as the news that the faeces discovered in the woods are believed to be of ursine origin. In the Independent today, Dominic Lawson cuts through the seemingly continuous media coverage of the matter to the question of whether it actually matters: “More to the point, given that there are no objective economic benefits to the nations holding such competitions (whatever the kudos to local political dignitaries such as Boris Johnson) shouldn't we as taxpayers feel grateful if other countries managed to offer more successful bribes? They, and not us, are the ones who've been Blattered.

It may take another week to discover if Phil Woolas has the right to challenge the election court ruling that destroyed his career. To the delight of his cadre of supporters in the House, judges have said there are "difficult questions to resolve" - not about the evidence of Woolas' campaign making "false statements", but about the specific application of the Representation of the People Act (RPA). Before the last die is cast, here are two quick contextual points. First, it is not just Harriet Harman who is keen to shut down this episode - many folks on all sides of the House of Commons would like to pretend skulduggery of this kind is exceptional. It is not - Phil Woolas' behaviour is far from untypical of northern politics.

If this is what bespoke PR produces, save your money. The Standard alleges that Number 10 has hired 26 ‘civil servants’. These latter-day Sir Humphreys include: a photographer, a stylist, a PR consultant to run the PM’s personal website, a diary keeper for Sam Cam and another addition to the Behavioural Insight Team at the Cabinet Office. Now, I like a bit of behavioural insight as much as the next man. But most, if not all, of these recruits have worked together in CCHQ for years: how much more insight can they glean in their new surroundings? Open up the field, many say, which poses another problem because it may transpire that these positions were not advertised.

One thing's for certain: the Lib Dems are coming in for greater scrutiny and attention from the media.  The covers of the Telegraph, Sun, Mail, Express and, yes, The Spectator are testament to that - even if some are less substantial than others.  But the question is: will this derail the Clegg bandwagon?  And, like Iain Dale, I'm not so sure. Iain's point is that some of the coverage is so spiteful that it will "serve to increase his popularity and position in the polls".  He adds that this would be a "sure sign that the power of the press to influence an election is on the wane".  He's right, and the theme he identifies is one of the major currents that's swirling about underneath the surface of this election campaign.

There was something particularly depressing about Harriet Harman’s statement to the House today on this lobbying scandal. The MPs involved have damned themselves more effectively than anybody else could and so the anger of the Commons lacked bite. Though, it was noticeable that the personal attacks on those involved tended to come from their own side not the opposition benches; proof that for many this is another episode in the long running battle for the soul of the Labour party. David Heath, the Lib Dem shadow leader of the House, made probably the best speech. He wanted to know why the House was always reacting to these problems rather than pre-empting them.