Isabel Hardman

Nick Clegg gave his monthly press conference today. It might kindly be described as 'wide-ranging', which is often code in journalese for 'not offering very much'. But the Deputy Prime Minister did offer a few nuggets which are worth exploring. The first is that he was very keen to put his name on the list of figures at the top of the Coalition trumpeting the improved economic circumstances. 'I am not going to use that phrase,' he said, when asked whether he could see 'green shoots' in the economy. 'I'm happy to use any other euphemism: the clouds are lifting… the sinews of the British economy are starting to strengthen.' A victory for muscular liberalism, clearly.

Sarah Teather's decision to stand down at the 2015 election won't surprise many people who know what a battle the Lib Dem MP would have had to hold onto her Brent Central seat. Her majority is only 1,345. But her public reason for standing down is interesting, too, even if some may suspect that the battle for Brent held more sway. Teather is an example of the Liberal Democrat party getting used to government, and, in the politest way possible, growing up.

After going all out over the Falkirk selection row, Labour rather quietly issued a statement this afternoon conceding that neither Unite's candidate Karie Murphy, nor constituency party chair Stephen Deans, nor the union itself were guilty of any wrongdoing. The party's statement said: 'The Labour Party began an internal process to examine the controversy surrounding the selection of a parliamentary candidate for Falkirk. At each step Labour’s general secretary and NEC have acted quickly to protect the interest of the party. 'Since Labour began its internal process key evidence has been withdrawn and further evidence provided by individuals concerned. Karie Murphy and Steve Deans, who were suspended, will now be reinstated as they have not been guilty of any wrongdoing.

There's nothing wrong with the Prime Minister turning up to PMQs with a snappy line that he wants those watching to remember. But sometimes as the exchanges wear on, the risk grows that the clever line isn't going to get a showing because the questions haven't been quite right. And so the line gets shoehorned into an answer that isn't quite relevant. Take today's question from Margaret Beckett on the lobbying bill that last night some Tory MPs decided to vote against. Beckett asked: 'Why does the PM believe that his plans to restrict lobbying are opposed by organisations from the Salvation Army, Countryside Alliance, Oxfam, the British Legion and so on, right through to ConservativeHome?

MPs will vote on the second reading of the unpopular lobbying bill at around 7pm. It has not had a particularly enjoyable introduction to the Commons this afternoon, with attacks from Labour and nervous questions from Coalition MPs worried about its effect on innocent charities. Some Tory MPs - including Douglas Carswell - intend to vote against the second reading, but from conversations I've had with backbenchers this afternoon, it looks as though a bigger rebellion will come on the programme motion, which puts the bill into a committee of the whole house (good) but with a guillotine - or time limit - for debate (bad). The reason the guillotine is bad is that it stops proper consideration of the bill, cutting the number of opportunities to iron out flaws.