Madness to remove him?

Just as the calls for George Osborne's removal seemed to be dying down,his piece in yesterday's Times has put the Shadow chancellor right back in the limelight.

The Sunday Times carries a piece from Isabel Oakeshott which says that

Activists contributing to party websites have labelled his interventions on Gordon Brown’s economic policy as ill-judged. Some on the ConservativeHome website voiced fears that he could cost the party the next election.

This morning's Observer leads with the report that

The shadow Chancellor was forced to defend himself after Labour aides and small business organisations accused him of talking down sterling despite a convention that politicians do not predict currency collapses. Kenneth Clarke, the man some MPs now want to replace Osborne, had to ride to his rescue, insisting his words were 'perfectly sensible'.

although in the same publication Andrew Rawnsley says that moves to possibly replace him would be

madness. For David Cameron to fire his Shadow Chancellor would be to humiliate his closest collaborator in the modernisation of the Tory party and to present a tasty scalp to Peter Mandelson. Having been through a couple of involuntary departures himself, the Dark Prince would relish having the head of his Corfu holiday companion in his trophy cabinet.

This affair has been the hot political potatow of the last few days and with Gordon Brown riding high in Washington,even more of the spotlight is going to fall on Osborne.

Peter Hoskin,I think sums up the problem for the Shadow Chancellor saying that the

worry for Osborne is that he's pulled this attack out of the locker too early. The shadow chancellor's right to have concerns about the pound, but by voicing them now he is - rightly or wrongly - open to the accusation that he's encouraging the "torment" scenario rather than the "tonic" scenario