If you're the kind of person that is deeply suspicious of David Cameron, today's papers make entertaining reading. 

Three commentators in The Times argue very different viewpoints:

• Danny Finkelstein outlines a highly convoluted argument to prove that Quentin Davies' defection is nothing to worry about ('Advice from a chimp')
  
• More convincing is Alice Miles expresses her incredulity that, given his record, QD can find a home in the Labour party. However, she tries a little too hard and her suggestion that this is a spectacular own goal by Brown is over the top ('First day, first humiliation for Mr Brown')
• Peter Riddell hits the nail right on the head when he says:

"Quentin Davies will be lucky to have as much as 24 hours of fame. But what a 24 hours!"

The Independent is in agreement ('A twist of the knife') whilst The Guardian pushes too far the other way ('A devastating defection')

The Telegraph does its best to ignore the story altogether - it's not mentioned on their websites home page (though it is bulleted on the front page of the print edition), nor is it a big enough story to warrant any mentions in its leaders.  However, like many other papers, it prints the correspondence between Davies and Cameron in full.  The comparisons with Douglas Howe are a little far fetched, but there are many good lines that one can imagine hitting the streets in Ealing, Sedgefield and other potential by-elections over the next few weeks (Hull East, Streatham, Hamilton North and any other by election rumours doing the rounds at the moment)

The Brown vs Cameron match has certainly started.

Also in today's news

• If the advance of celebrity politics worries you, you won't be pleased about yesterday's meeting of Tony Blair and Arnold Schwarzenegger.  Both are feeding off the characteristics that one personifies and the other lacks.  Simon Hoggart identifies the important characteristics of the meeting ('Hasta la vista, Tony')
• Ming Campbell gives an interview to The Times ('My age is a benefit, not a problem')