Gordon Brown and bullying: The National Bullying helpline joke

Ms Pratt said she was not saying the PM was a bully, but said some of his staff "have concerns". Downing Street has yet to respond to the claims.

In other words, she's cast doubt on someone's character without having the proof to say so explicitly.

She says she was prompted into action by the fact Lord Mandelson had denied the claims of a volcanic-like prime minister, adding that Mandelson was "the wrong message to all chief executives or bosses in corporates who are accused of bullying - outright denial is just non-credible in today's age."

Apart from mangling the English language, Ms Pratt is guilty of forgetting one main fact: It's perfectly credible to deny bullying if it isn't actually happening.

But more remarkable to me is the fact that Ms Pratt spoke out at all, although the fact the only political endorsements on her website come from the Tories might raise a few eyebrows.

The basis of her statement that people from the PM's office have contacted her is based on people who "have downloaded information; some have actually called our helpline directly and I have spoken to staff in his office."

I think it's fair to assume that when downloading information from a helpline website, you are doing so anonymously. However, on this charity's website, you have to leave an email address, the name of your employer and your name before you receive their bullying guide. They then send you the said guide instantly, without any check on whether your employer is who you say it is.

It may well be that those who entered 'Prime Minister's office' were indeed working at Number 10. But an enter-want-you-want, no-checks-made box on a website is hardly cast iron proof of a bully.

As for those she spoke to, one can only hope she verified where they worked in more depth than simply tracking an email or logging an IP address.

Her charity states on its website that its objective is 'to address conflict, stress, risk and costly litigation.' I'm not sure how going public on unverified claims about bullying helps address the stress and risk of those making the allegations.

In fact, Ms Pratt's actions smack of being akin to those of a bully - making loud claims which have yet to be proven. Is it that different to finger-pointing and seeking to hurt someone?

And to those complaining (allegedly) in Brown's office, what do they think the public expect? Of course they want a PM who pushes people hard, is demanding, and has high expectations. Politics is largely built on bullying: look at PMQs each week, look at the very workings of the whip system.

Yes, people have a right to dignity in the workplace generally, but I can't help but think slightly different rules may apply in the top offices of Government. It's not as if people won't have guessed how such departments work.

What they probably won't have expected, however, is their private phone calls being used to gain publicity for a body which most people have never heard of.