Peter Hoskin

A persuasive passage (complete with a spiky, ministerial quote – highlighted) from Rachel Sylvester's column this morning: "There is growing concern among some Shadow Cabinet ministers and strategists about the increasingly aggressive tone Mr Cameron uses against Mr Brown. It is, they believe, no coincidence that the poll gap has narrowed as the Tory leader launches a series of increasingly vitriolic personal attacks on the Prime Minister. Last week, for example, by turning the bully into the victim, Mr Cameron seems to have simply solidified support for Mr Brown. There was a similar backlash to the Conservatives’ misleading 'death tax' poster campaign.

Yeah, I know: 4,500 words of Brown's rhetoric is too much for most CoffeeHousers to bear.  So I thought I'd read his "speech on crime and anti-social behaviour" on your behalf, and highlight three things which jumped out at me.  Here goes: 1. Taking on the Tories over DNA retention. Paul Waugh has already blogged on what may turn out to be the most significant passage of Brown's speech – at least so far as the cut 'n' thrust of the election campaign is concerned.  In it, Brown highlights the case of Jeremiah Sheridan, who raped a woman some 19 years ago, but was caught last year thanks to DNA evidence retained after Sheridan was arrested – but not convicted – for an offence in 2005.

First the tragedy, then the farce: if there was something dark, perhaps shocking, about last weekend's bullying allegations, then the latest Rawnsley revelations veer towards the hilarious.  They're centred around Brown's efforts to oust Tony Blair, and the Guardian covers them here.  I won't pre-empt your enjoyment of them, except to highlight this passage from the report: "Rawnsley reveals that Brown rang Blair while he was staying with the Queen at Balmoral. He was furious that Alan Milburn, Blair's close ally, had written a piece supporting the prime minister's right to stay at No 10. Rawnsley writes: 'The chancellor's fury was titanically demented even by his standards. 'You put fucking Milburn up to it,' Brown raged down the phone. 'This is factionalism!

Two related points, worth repeating. The first from Ben Brogan: "Mr Brown is on surer ground on a narrow point, in that in all likelihood he did not explicitly order his Eighth Circle chums to unleash hell against Mr Darling. Then again, he didn't need to. His reaction to the Chancellor's Guardian interview will have had the required Henry II effect. If Dave wanted some sport [in PMQs], surely, he should have asked whether Ed Balls ordered his friends to undermine Mr Darling. He wanted the job after all, and as has long been realised, there was what amounted to a Balls operation within the Brown operation designed to promote his interests as alternative Chancellor and future Labour leader.

Here I am, in a cavernous "space" in East London, for a conference on the Post-Bureaucratic Age - or  "See-Through Government," as Guido more evocatively put it. David Cameron has kicked things off with a speech on the issue, and there'll be talks and panels throughout the day. It's like Glastonbury for policy wonks. So how was Cameron? Well, he's normally at his snappiest and most persuasive when he talks about all this tech stuff - and today was no exception. All the usual lines about "handing power to the people," and eroding "the dull, stultifying presence of state control," made an encouraging appearance. And he outlined what this would mean in practice, with new policies on town planning, for instance.

The question tonight is: which piece of bad news will make the biggest impact?  The bad news for the Tories, or the bad news for Labour? Let's take the second one first.  I'm referring, of course, to the first installment in Andrew Rawnsley's revelations about Gordon Brown.  ConHome have already published some snippets – click here – and they give you plenty of juice for your buck.  Not only are there the expected allegations about Brown hitting his staff (much of which seems to have been covered in the Mail on Sunday a couple of weeks ago), but Rawsley also reveals that the Cabinet Secretary, Gus O'Donnell, investigated and reprimanded the PM for his behaviour.

Labour have certainly come out of the traps snarling and gnashing this morning.  For one, they're making the most of two letters in the FT, signed by 60 economists, which ostensibly support their position on the public finances.  And then there's Gordon Brown's speech to European leaders, in which he implores them to tackle the "hatred" of "the right".  Naturally, by "the right", he means "David Cameron". It's those letters which really grab the attention, though.  Not really because of what they say, or who has signed them, but because they're suggestive of how the debate over the public finances is going to go.  Yep, the Tories get 20 economists to write a letter in support of their deficit-reduction plans, so Labour respond with 60 economists of their own.

Readers of the magazine will be familiar with Michael Heath's series of 'Flash Gordon' cartoons, based on the life and sulks of our glorious Prime Minister.  Well, now it's got a successor – 'Dave' – which, naturally enough, focuses on the Tory leader and would-be PM, Mr Cameron.  Here's the first of them, from this week's issue, for the benefit CoffeeHousers.