But Mr Prescott will be back on the road with his own battle bus for the campaign.Mr Campbell was disillusioned with a hostile national media – a theme he has pursued in his personal appearances since resigning from Downing Street in August 2003. We are not just going to have the Prime Minister on Richard and Judy. He will still be open to questioning, but it will be around the country.”Alan Milburn, Labour’s campaign strategy chief, said the new style of campaign was an attempt to overcome media and Conservative “cynicism” to “connect with the public”.It is unlikely he had in mind the punch thrown by John Prescott in the 2001 campaign after the Deputy Prime Minister was hit in the ear by an egg. He left during the Hutton inquiry into the death of Dr David Kelly, which exonerated Mr Campbell.Mr Campbell will be unpaid for his part-time role but is likely to be a frequent visitor to the new Labour headquarters in Victoria Street, Westminster, a few doors from the Tory HQ above a Starbucks coffee house.Peter Mandelson, Britain’s EU commissioner, is also expected to offer his informal advice to Mr Blair but the leadership is keen to avoid exacerbating tensions with Gordon Brown, the Chancellor, who is still bruised after being replaced by Mr Milburn as strategy chief.Mr Milburn said the campaign will be “anchored” in the economy, and will promote optimism over cynicism..

“They are having TV debates in the Ukraine, but Tony Blair won’t have one in Britain,” said a Tory source.Denying the charge, a Labour official said: “This is not about avoiding scrutiny. Tony Blair fired the gun for a 5 May election yesterday, but faced criticism as it emerged that he planned to dispense with morning press conferences in London and do away with the campaign battle bus. He has already admitted a mistake and agreed to refund the money.There were reports yesterday that Mrs Quinn’s friends were deserting her after it emerged at the weekend that she was having an affair with the journalist Simon Hoggart at the same time as she was engaged in a relationship with Mr Blunkett. There was also speculation that she might return to her native America with her husband, Stephen.. A report by Sir Philip Mawer, the Parliamentary Standards Commissioner, was discussed yesterday by the Commons Standards and Privileges Committee, which will announce today whether the former home secretary should be punished or reprimanded.

His verdict could also make uncomfortable reading for Tony Blair,whose informal governing style was criticised by Lord Butler of Brockwell in his report on the pre-war intelligence on Iraq in July.What is may the inquiry likely to find?Downing Street admits that there was a “gap” between Mr Blunkett’s original version of events and that unearthed by Sir Alan. Mr Blunkett said that on 12 March 2003 he read the application form for indefinite leave to remain in Britain by Leoncia Casalme, the nanny of his lover, Kimberly Quinn, with a private secretary. But Sir Alan found that Mr Blunkett handed a letter telling Ms Casalme her case could take up to a year to his private office on 29 April, which faxed it to the office of Bill Jeffrey, director general of the Immigration and Nationality Department (IND) in Croydon. The Tories will demand a wider inquiry by a senior judge if today’s report fails to answer all the unresolved questions.Mr Davis said: “Sir Alan Budd’s inquiry has had a limited remit and limited powers. If he is able to get to the bottom of these matters then the question for the Government will be what action it will take to put right a seeming culture of incompetence, collusion and cover-up at its heart.”If, however, Sir Alan is unable to explain clearly the series of inaccuracies, incomplete statements and misleading briefings, accounts and denials which have subsequently been proven wrong – then we will need a new, judge-led inquiry with witnesses giving evidence under oath and with a remit that covers all the allegations.”Mr Blunkett will also discover today whether he faces any further action for giving Mrs Quinn two rail travel warrants worth £180 for MPs’ spouses. “I can’t think of a Filipina nanny in the country who has this categorisation, other than this one,” the source said. “It would suggest that somebody did not want her case to be widely known.”David Davis, the shadow Home Secretary, said the revelation reinforced his concern that a cover-up may have taken place as far back as last year.

“People are looking for a conspiracy but it was a cock-up,” one said.However, there were fresh claims of a cover-up last night after it emerged that the nanny’s case file had been marked “restricted”. A senior source at the IND revealed that the classification was imposed last year after Ms Casalme was given indefinite leave to remain in Britain. No Home Office officials can remember what instructions were written on it.Mr Blunkett resigned last week after Sir Alan discovered he had given a misleading version of events. It will be anxiously awaited by Mr Blunkett, Tony Blair and Home Office officials accused of concealing what role the former home secretary played in securing in securing a visa for Leoncia Casalme, the nanny of Kimberly Quinn with whom he had a three-year affair.Speculation about a cover-up has been fuelled by the revelation that a crucial fax sent by Mr Blunkett’s private office to the Immigration and Nationality Department (IND) was destroyed. Initially, he claimed to have read Ms Casalme’s application but had not put her case into the system.Although the case was dealt with more quickly than usual, Sir Alan is expected to conclude that it was handled within the rules because many applications were being fast-tracked at the time, ahead of the introduction of charges.Ministers believe Sir Alan will play down the idea of a Home Office cover-up after the inquiry was launched. The official inquiry into the alleged fast-tracking of a residency visa application by the nanny of David Blunkett’s former lover will dismiss claims that there was a Home Office cover-up, ministers predicted last night.
The report by Sir Alan Budd, a former Treasury adviser, is to be published today. There are 11 foreign suspects held under the law, most of whom have been imprisoned without charge at Belmarsh jail since December 2001.Mr Macdonald said: “I have resigned for reasons of conscience It is up to other lawyers to make up their own minds …

We need to have a full return to trial by jury, a proper criminal trial with proper accusations As far as I’m concerned, the Government have to .. rethink their whole strategy.”. They are thought to include Nicholas Blake, QC, Andrew Nicol, QC, Rick Scannell and Tom de la Mare.Under the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act introduced in 2001, foreign nationals suspected of involvement in terrorism who cannot be deported can be held indefinitely without trial. The dispute follows a House of Lords’ ruling last week that the system was unlawful and a breach of the Government’s human rights obligations.Mr Macdonald said he felt the Government had “used” him and his colleagues to give a veneer of legitimacy to an “intolerable” distortion of the rule of law.Several special advocates are also known to feel great unease with the current system, but are not expected to take any action until Mr Clarke has given his full response to the ruling. The threat followed the decision by Ian Macdonald, QC, to stand down as one of the 15-strong panel of special advocates, barristers appointed by the Attorney General to represent foreign terror suspects at secret hearings.At least four more senior lawyers are understood to be considering resigning unless Mr Clarke changes the law on the indefinite detention of terrorist suspects without trial. But the Home Secretary said he would not be forced into a hasty decision.