Few laments for Irvine as press sizes up Lord Falconer

There was only really one story this week, and what a joy it was for the media - groundbreaking constitutional change mixed with a whiff of ministerial in-fighting meant that last week's reshuffle generated a lot of juicy column inches.

The sense of pleasure on Fleet Street was almost tangible as the papers gleefully reported the departure from government of the man they had variously dubbed as 'donkey' Derry Irvine, or 'Lord Botch-up' (The Financial Times, 13 June).

Perhaps unfairly, the historic abolition of the 1,400-year-old post of Lord Chancellor was used as an excuse for papers to rehash their old 'Pugin and pensions' stories.

The Financial Times claimed that 'Lord Irvine's gaffes overshadow his reforms', and admitted that 'it is the personal attacks on a man widely regarded as overbearingly arrogant that will probably be best remembered'.

Dutifully running through the tales of Irvine decking out his official residence in '300-a-roll Pugin wallpaper' and accepting a 22,000 pay rise earlier this year, the paper warned that 'more could follow: a row is sure to erupt over his golden parachute deal, reportedly worth as much as 3 million'.

Writing in the London Evening Standard, AN Wilson agreed that Lord Irvine 'cut a ridiculous figure' in his wig and robes, looking 'as if he was about to sing words by WS Gilbert', but argued that the Lord Chancellor, under the Crown, 'was one of the great protectors of our freedom' (16 June).

He 'ensured that our judiciary and our entire legal system were independent of party political interference', and abolition of the role is 'the worst political measure to occur in our lifetimes'.

The Sunday papers took up the story with gusto, The Sunday Times leading with the claim that Lord Irvine was sacked by Tony Blair for refusing to accept the prime minister's legal reforms, including abolition of his department.

Mr Blair apparently found the deed as traumatising as the time he sacked Peter Mandelson, one 'close ally' told the paper.

At the final confrontation, aides were also apparently worried that Lord Irvine might 'explode'.

The Observer, meanwhile, reported that the cabinet was not consulted on the reforms to the legal system, the sensitivity of the situation meaning that Mr Blair only discussed it with his closest advisers and did not set up a cabinet sub-committee to scrutinise the reforms, as would normally be the case.

'How could you discuss it around the cabinet table when the person whose job you were discussing was sitting right there?' one 'key official closely involved in the process' told the paper.

Although one so-called crony has been shown the door, the media was quick to anoint a successor in the unpopularity stakes.

'Tories attack choice of Tony's crony' announced The Financial Times, explaining that the appointment of Charles Falconer, Tony Blair's former flatmate and the head of the newly created Department of Constitutional Affairs, 'had sparked an immediate row, with the Tories claiming that yet another of Tony's cronies had achieved high office on the back of a close friendship with the prime minister rather than election to Parliament'.

Muck began to flow freely, with the paper pointing out that the 'wealthy' Lord Falconer, a 'childhood friend' of the Prime Minister, has had to endure not merely 'niggles that he is not accountable', but also 'tabloid jibes about his weight'.

The Times noted that, mindful of his public image and his health, Lord Falconer has lost two stones in the past two years (13 June).

His public attitude has also changed: 'In the early days, he was disarmingly frank and charming but he has now adopted a tougher front...

he is not as happy as in earlier years to chat about his encyclopedic knowledge of rock and pop hits'.

Elsewhere, one of the main players in the cabinet - home secretary David Blunkett - made headlines with his proposals to overhaul the criminal justice system.

His plans to introduce 'US-style public prosecutors and locally elected police boards' were greeted with 'interest but some scepticism' (The Times, 12 June).

The Telegraph in particular was unsure about how to treat the plans, claiming that 'we would give a much warmer welcome to David Blunkett's proposals if we thought he was actually serious about implementing them' (12 June).

Victoria MacCallum