The Sketch: Every day, in every way, Tony grows more charming

The Prime Minister's charm grows daily. The soft voice suits him, the effortless command it suggests, the decency it projects, the sincerity it bespeaks.

This isn't to deny that he's decent and sincere, incidentally, but neither does it suggest that decency and sincerity are any excuse. There are many things you can be decent and sincere about, especially if you're the Prime Minister: they're so much out there for your compassion to batten on to.

Among his other virtues, he made everyone laugh. Old Labour's David Taylor asked him to tell President George Bush that the American neglect of old allies, scorn for diplomacy and a cavalier disregard of the international community was not the best foundation for the transatlantic bridge we are trying to build.

Mr Blair stood up in the solemnity of the occasion and went: "Er, no, I don't think I'll be saying anything quite like that." He seems to like President Bush, I've noticed. He's always sticking up for him. Anyway, everyone laughed; you had to.

Charles Kennedy told the House that he wanted a United Nations-led administration in post-war Iraq, not a United States-led one. Mr Kennedy is on the side of the angels in this (otherworldly, insubstantial and generally not very useful).

"I don't believe there will be any need to persuade President Bush of that," Mr Blair said. The President, according to the Prime Minister, is as keen as the next man to get UN agreement to the post-Saddam administration.

Yes, but the next man is Donald Rumsfeld and he couldn't give a flying fig for the UN after what they've been through together. But none the less, we are told Mr Bush entirely approves of the oil-for-food programme (whereby Iraq pays for its own humanitarian aid) and that it should be endorsed by a further UN resolution.

"I keep reading about American scepticism," Mr Blair said on this point, "but in every conversation I've had with the President he's made it clear that ..." The shorthand gave out.

Broadly speaking, there is no rift between Messrs Bush and Blair because Mr Blair agrees with everything Mr Bush suggests, and Mr Bush doesn't seem to have got round to giving his loyal ally the bad news.

Of course, Mr Blair may be making an elementary mistake, of believing what a politician says. Honestly, you'd think he'd know better. He of all people.

The rumour I hear is that Dick Cheney won't let Blair and Bush alone together for more than eight minutes. That is a compliment to Mr Blair's persuasive abilities.

But does he really have the ability to charm the United States back into the smoking rubble of the Security Council? And if he does, might it not destroy him? If experience is anything to go by.

Simoncarr75@hotmail.com