Hilary A smells the coffee

So Hilary Armstrong has announced she is stepping down from the Cabinet at the same time as Tony Blair, John Prescott and John Reid on 27 June to give Gordon Brown maximum room for manoeuvre as he reshapes his team.

I think this is what is known as taking the dignified way out, as opposed to the fate awaiting John Hutton, Tessa Jowell and probably Charlie Falconer when Gordo's first Cabinet is finally unveiled.

Armstrong is what I have always described as an absurd loyalist, namely someone who takes loyalty to the leader to the point of absurdity. Never was this more clear than in her conversation with the defecting Labour MP Paul Marsden when she actually uttered the phrase "We don't have spin doctors in Number 10 - or anywhere else."

The chances of her getting a Cabinet job under Gordon Brown were nil. The only thing to be said in her favour is that, unlike some of the others awaiting the axe, she had the good sense to realise this.

A farcical denouement

My wife Gill and I are both complete addicts of The Apprentice but I can't help but feel a bit cheated by last night's "semi final" in which arch-backstabber Katie Hopkins decided to fall on her own sword despite being told she was through to next week's final.

To be honest I've been longing for her to get fired ever since she dissed Northerners and Pinot Grigio-drinkers in the course of her character-assassination of Adam in Week 7. But she was undoubtedly the star of this series, and a final bitch fight showdown between her and gritty single mum Kristina was what most fans were keenly anticipating.

Kristina is still there, of course, but instead she's up against posh Cambridge graduate and failed City Boy Simon, who has somehow managed to survive this far despite making a total arse of himself during the TV sales channel task and on numerous other occasions throughout the series.

I hope Kristina wins, but I fear she will not, as Sir Alan Sugar clearly has a liking for Simon having passed up obvious oportunities to fire him before now. More in-depth Apprentice analysis from Paul Burgin and Kerron Cross.

Update: More on Katie Nice Person HERE. Read it if you can bear.

No spin is the new spin?

Plenty of lively debate over at Iain Dale's place over whether Gordon Brown attempted to strongarm the Sunday lobby into carrying the line about his terror crackdown without balancing comment from Nick Clegg and David Davis. Three experienced Sunday pol eds, Paddy Hennessy, Ian Kirby and Nick Watt, have vehemently denied the claims but the thread is well worth a read.

Whether it's true or not, I was equally concerned to read this story in the UK Press Gazette about a local reporter who was allegedly subjected to bully-boy tactics from one of Brown's minders.

I do hope that this isn't going to be the shape of things to come under Gordon. He has made very clear that it is his intention to lead a new style of government and, as I made clear in this post, if this is to mean anything it must entail an end to the spin culture.

The row over David Maclean's bid to exempt MPs from the Freedom of Information Act, which was enthusiastically backed by Nick "Newcastle" Brown and other high-profile Brown cronies, was not a good start on this score. Neither, if true, are the examples highlighted by Dale and the UKPG.

Benn turns the tables on Cruddas

The last time I carried out a Poll on Labour's deputy leadership earlier this year it produced the following result.

Jon Cruddas 35%
Hilary Benn 28%
Alan Johnson 7%
Peter Hain 5%
Harriet Harman 4%
Hazel Blears 3%
Jack Straw 3%
None of the above 15%

A few weeks' back I decided to run the poll again as the contest is now "live," minus Straw who decided against running. After the same length of time, the updated poll produced the following outcome (percentage movement in brackets):

Hilary Benn 48% (+20)
Jon Cruddas 24% (-10)
Alan Johnson 10% (+3)
Hazel Blears 8% (+5)
Harriet Harman 5% (+1)
Peter Hain 4% (-1)

Now of course all this is totally unscientific, but assuming that (a) some of my readers are Labour Party or union members, and (b) that some of the same people voted, it does seem to me to indicate two things:

1. Hilary Benn now has a big lead in grassroots support - which is what most other polls on the matter are saying anyway.

2. By carving himself out a distinct niche in this contest as the "change" candidate, Jon Cruddas continues to steal a march on the more established ministerial heopfuls.

It is still way to early to try to call this contest, but I do now expect Hazel Blears and Peter Hain to be the first two candidates eliminated, although I am not sure in what order. I expect much of Blears' support to go to Alan Johnson, while a lot of Hain's will go to Cruddas.

Since Harriet Harman and Cruddas have endorsed eachother, their second prefernces may well transfer to eachother in later ballots. The question is whether there will be enough of them to overtake Mr Benn, and at the moment, you have to say it is looking unlikely.

Vote early, vote often

I see that James Higham is inviting nominations for the Blog Power awards, the winners of which will be presumably chosen by other bloggers as opposed to members of the Tory Party or senior editorial staff of the Guardian as with certain other blogging awards.

I am most grateful to whoever it was who nominated this blog for Best British Blog and also for Best Political Blog, but it seems I still need a seconder if anyone feels inclined!

To nominate, e-mail jameshighamatmaildotcom.

Graham Brady is right

Like most people on the centre-left, I have grown up with the idea that Grammar Schools are elitist and socially divisive. But the ongoing row in the Tory Party over the issue has forced me to take a fresh look at this, and in particular to ask myself what a "progressive" position on academic selection would look like in today's world.

Reluctantly, I have come to the conclusion that Graham Brady is right when he argues that selection by academic ability is a greater engine of social mobility than selection by house prices.

Near to where I live in Derbyshire, there is a former Grammar School which nevertheless retains many of the facets of one, which is regarded for miles around as the school to get your children into.

As a result, house prices in that village and the surrounding area are a good 20-30pc higher than in those areas which lie slightly outside the catchment area, meaning that only better-off families can in fact afford to send their kids there.

I don't doubt that there are countless other examples of this kind of effect across the country, a consequence of the exponential growth in house prices since comprehensive education was but a twinkle in Tony Crosland's eye.

By ditching his party's previous policy on creating new grammars, Tory leader David Cameron thinks he is being "modern" and "progressive." In fact he is doing what the Tory Party has historically always done - standing up for the interests of the wealthy elite who can afford homes near the top state schools against those who have to make do with what Alastair Campbell called "bog standard" comprehensives.

In my view, if Gordon Brown wants to lead a genuinely progressive government, as well as outflanking Cameron on an issue of real concern to the hard-working classes, he should take a very close look at what Graham Brady and the other Tory rebels are saying.

How about this for an autumn conference speech soundbite, Gordon? "Read my lips - no selection by house prices or interview under a Labour Government."