Isabel Hardman

It was only last week that a Tory MP was warning Coffee House of the dangerous impact that high levels of public debt can have on growth. Today that theory is fighting for its life, with the authors of the Harvard paper that developed it in the first place in the firing line for an error in a spreadsheet. If you haven't been following the Reinhart and Rogoff row, here's a quick catch-up: a paper from two professors and a doctoral student at the University of Massachusetts published this week argues that Carman Reinhart and Kenneth Rogoff of Harvard were wrong to reach the conclusion they did about a 90% debt to GDP ratio seriously affecting the growth of a country's economy.

Eric Pickles did manage to avert a defeat in the Commons on plans to let homeowners build extensions and conservatories without planning permission, but it's worth asking how on earth the government managed to get in the position where its backbench was so worked up on a policy like this in the first place? The amendment, tabled by Lord True and approved by peers - would have allowed councils to opt out of the new freedoms.

Parliament's only just back from Easter recess and already there's a threat of rebellion in the Commons. The Growth and Infrastructure Bill returns to the Commons tomorrow afternoon for 'ping-pong', and a number of MPs are agitated about an amendment that passed as a result of a rebellion in the Upper Chamber. In March, the Lords passed an amendment from Tory peer Lord True which would allow councils to opt out of a policy giving homeowners the right to extend their homes without planning permission. The government is naturally seeking to overturn that amendment, but Tory MPs aren't convinced.

Ed Miliband may have politely told Tony Blair what to do with his advice about the direction of the Labour party, but the former Labour Prime Minister's allies aren't quite so keen to let his New Statesman piece disappear into the party recycling bin just yet. On today's political programmes, they popped up to drive home their belief that Blair should jolly well be listened to, not ignored. Tessa Jowell was so keen to make this point on Murnaghan that she managed to turn the discussion on Margaret Thatcher around to how much Blair had to offer politics twice.

Tony Blair asked Labour seven awkward questions this week, ranging from issues that everyone's talking about to rather more quirky ones that the former Prime Minister would like everyone to talk about, like using advances in DNA to fight crime. It's the mid-term, when parties start to wonder what they can tell voters they stand for in the next general election, what problems they believe the country is facing, and, more importantly, whether they think they've got a hope of solving them. I've spent most of today talking to Tory MPs about what they think the seven awkward questions for their own party might be, and here they are, in all their awkward and quirky glory: 1. How do the Tories address public concern on immigration while continuing to be a globalised economy?

David Cameron is setting off with his children to visit Angela Merkel on Friday. It's part of his EU reform mission that started and was thrown off course on Monday following the death of Margaret Thatcher. As I blogged back then, the circumstances aren't perfect, and one of the reasons for that is that France and Germany recently snubbed an invitation to be involved in the UK's 'balance of competences' review. But today Cameron tried to play down the significance of this. He told Adam Boulton: 'Our review of competences was always and will be a British exercise. We didn't particularly, that story was… anyone's free to feed into our review, but that piece of work is a British piece of work. For years people said you'll never have the European budget cut, I've got it cut.

Today's debates in Parliament about Baroness Thatcher were supposed to be a tribute to the first female Prime Minister. If you were looking for the most faithful rendition of this, you should have been sitting in the House of Lords, not the Commons this afternoon. In the Other Place, the debate is always rather more civilised and measured, though it has grown rather rowdier in recent years. But today the speeches painted a fascinating picture of Margaret Thatcher, not least because many of them came from those who worked with or in opposition to her when she was in power. Some were notable by their silence: Lord Howe arrived with notes, but left without speaking. Lord Heseltine was nowhere to be seen.

Well, that was inevitable. Sir James Crosby's announcement that he wants to give his knighthood back and forego a slice of his pension is surprising only in that it came a little sooner after the Parliamentary Commission on Banking Standards' report than everyone expected. He could have waited for a real public outcry to build, as it did with Fred Goodwin, but instead he's managed to walk off with a pension that's still £406,000 and perhaps a little dignity. Fraser argued last week that politicians are the ones who should be squirming over the banking crisis, but what Crosby's decision today shows is that the Banking Commission is wielding an impressive amount of power as it rumbles through its inquiries and reports.