Lord Irvine dubbed a 'donkey' in storm over burglars

The furore over Lord Irvine's comments about imprisoning burglars - or rather not imprisoning them - has placed the Lord Chancellor firmly in the tabloids' sights, never the most comfortable place to be.

The Sun has waged an especially strong campaign along the lines of 'if the law is an ass, what does that make Lord Irvine?' It even went to the extreme in one double-page spread - entitled 'Drop the dud donkey' - of dressing a donkey in a Sun flag and a judicial wig, and leading him for some entertaining photographs outside Parliament (9 January).

'Lord Chancellor Derry Irvine got an almighty kick up the ass yesterday,' the story began, 'from a Sun donkey dressed in a wig and legal robes.

Our heehaw helper was loaded with hundreds of e-mails from angry readers braying that he gets fired.'

A 'You the jury' poll found an 'overwhelming' 98.5% of the public in favour of sacking 'Donkey Derry', while a string of vox pops were all too ready to have a pop.

'I can't believe Irvine said burglars shouldn't go to prison,' Hazel Bamford, 77, from Macclesfield, told the paper.

'He should go to prison himself for saying that.'

Of course, that was not what Lord Irvine or the Lord Chief Justice Lord Woolf, who started this all off with sentencing guidelines issued before Christmas, did say, but that was not going to stop anyone, least of all a government on the defensive over its record on crime.

'Downing Street slapped down the Lord Chancellor, Lord Irvine, and the country's most senior judge yesterday for suggesting that some burglars should not be sent to prison,' the Daily Telegraph reported on its front page (8 January).

However, the article pointed up the government's confusion over the issue.

An 'unusually blunt' spokesman for the prime minister was quoted as issuing a rebuff to the two Lords, but then said a community sentence may be appropriate for first-time offenders in minor cases.

'In so far as the Lord Chief Justice is saying something different, or appears to be saying something different, then we would disagree with that - but we are not sure that he is.' And indeed, he was not - it has just been the way his comments have been spun.

But that did not stop The Sun resuming its assault this week on the back of 'an astonishing attack' by an unnamed 'senior government figure' against these 'two muddled old codgers' (13 January).

An editorial took up the cudgels: 'They should be sentenced to be sent to a place where they can do no more harm - a retirement home for clapped-out lawyers.' And it finished: 'These two arrogant twits with their misguided liberal views are a danger to the public.'

Daily Mail columnist Melanie Phillips, saw the episode as a symbol of a much wider government malaise in an article entitled 'Patronising.

Arrogant.

Out of touch.

In short, isn't he the perfect New Labour grandee?'

Having nodded towards the infamous Pugin wallpaper and noting that, when back home, Lord Irvine lives in a 'heavily guarded Scottish mansion', Ms Phillips concluded: 'Lord Irvine may be considered to be a one-man own goal, but in displaying such a deep disconnection from ordinary people's lives, he sadly typifies the administration of which he is such a magnificent ornament.'

It was also not a great week for Solicitor-General Harriet Harman - or 'Ton-Up Hattie' as she was christened by The Independent - after she was caught actually doing just under a ton, 99 miles per hour, on the M4.

The Indie suggested that holding her hands up at once helped stop Ms Harman's career from coming off the road, and more pertinently, given the front-page coverage of all things crime, that 'the Solicitor-General's personal crimewave on the M4 does not count towards next year's crime statistics.

Speeding offences may be crimes, but they do not count in the official figures unless drink or damages is involved.'

Neil Rose