Gaffes are tricky to define. The classic trip-up is an error of the tongue (Jeremy C***), a consequence of a temporary absent-mindedness. But motivations are never entirely clear in politics, so we think the best way of sizing up whether a misguided comment is really a gaffe is to ask: did the person uttering these pearls of calamity really mean them to cause a massive stink? On that basis, here's our top ten gaffes of 2012...

10 - Francis Maude: Don't panic!

With the nation facing the spectre of a fuel strike back in March, Cabinet Office minister Francis Maude took to the airwaves to calm the nation. Yes, the situation was a bit wobbly, he said, and there might be a few fuel shortages here and there. So "a bit of petrol in a jerry can in the garage is a sensible precaution to take", he suggested. Maude didn't actually have the foggiest how much petrol you can cram into a jerry can; if every motorist were to have followed his not-so-sage advice, petrol stations would have been running

Such is the extent of the turmoil which British society now finds itself in that it's hard to tell where political scandals end and begin. They bleed into each other, prop each other up and together create a firestorm of anger and resentment at the UK's ruling elites: those in charge of our politics, our financial system and our media were all battered by public hostility in 2012. Mix all that up with the return of some old favourites (expenses, anyone?) and you get a mouth-watering pot pourri of outrageous, unacceptable failure. Prepare to get worked up.

(Last year's position in brackets. We've assessed these by looking at their impact on the political world, rather than the country as a whole. Which might explain why Chris Huhne's resignation ranks higher than the Libor scandal, for example.)

10 (-) Tax avoidance

This scandal has three parts: first came a massive £500 million move against Barclays from the taxman, who concluded the bank had been "highly abusive" and was now paying

Photo: ThinkstockBy David Hounsell

The government has just announced key details about how its flagship welfare reform programme, universal credit, will operate. These changes represent the largest shake-up of the welfare system in a generation. And they will have major knock-on effects.

One will be a change about which children are eligible to receive a free school meal. Under the current system, they can get a free school meal if their parents are not in work, work few hours or their family is on a very low income. Under this system, eligibility is distributed to families in receipt of certain benefits – for example job seekers allowance. After the introduction of universal credit, these benefits will no longer exist.

Now is a critical decision point for the government. They not only need to decide who should receive free school meals, but how it will work with the universal credit. Our Fair and Square campaign calls for a solution to this thorny issue.

The Children's Society is calling on the

By Sheila Duffy

The Scottish government will publish a new, comprehensive tobacco strategy early next year and it could be set to commit to a smoke-free future - as Finland and New Zealand have already done.

Aiming for an adult smoking rate of five per cent or less in roughly a generation is an ambitious but an achievable target. It depends on effectively helping the 69% of adult smokers who say they want to be smoke-free to achieve their ambitions, and preventing children from becoming hooked on tobacco.

The tobacco industry remains a pervasive and malignant influence in our society. It works through lawyers, lobbyists and funded front groups like Forest in a perpetual game of smoke and mirrors. It seeks to throw the focus on its customers, smokers, and away from the lethal and addictive product it continues to peddle. A product which is unlike anything else that can be bought over the counter in that when used as the manufacturers intend, it will reliably kill one in two long-term

Brace yourself, Your Majesty. The Cabinet meeting you're attending will be nothing but political theatre.

For six decades, the Queen has met up with her prime minister to talk over affairs of state. From Winston Churchill to David Cameron, Elizabeth II has talked over this and that. Their cost chit-chat usually follows a Cabinet meeting, in which the real governing is supposed to take place. Cabinet meetings are confidential because they are an opportunity for the government's senior ministers to argue about policy. The Queen is protected from this ugly side of everyday politics by the accommodating blandishments of the politician.

Not tomorrow. For the first time since Queen Victoria's reign, the head of state will attend a Cabinet meeting. "I'm sure we can find room for one more," the prime minister's spokesperson joked this morning.

Officially, this visit is the last in a right royal Diamond Jubilee tour of the establishment's great institutions. The monarch, who owes the great

Ukip appear to be the latest beneficiaries of a trend most politicians will only reluctantly admit exists. The biggest driver of national feeling about Britain's political parties is a visceral contempt for those who govern our lives.

In the old days, when Labour and the Conservatives were the established parties who took it in turns to rule Britain, there was once a party called the Liberal Democrats who filled that role. They were the party to turn to whenever an opportunity arose to reject the ruling classes. At by-election after by-election, it would be the Lib Dems who romped home. When the UK government embarked on a major invasion of a Middle Eastern power, it was the Lib Dems who reaped the rewards of opposition.

Now all that has changed. Nick Clegg is in government and his none-of-the-above bonus has been stripped away. So the real support for Britain's third party — not even managing double-figures in the polls — has emerged: they are now Britain's fourth party. After coming

A detail from work by Aga Maria PasternakThere is always a little bit of politics in all art. But at a new hotel just around the corner from Westminster, a new collection of contemporary art offers a rare opportunity for the politico to revel in work focusing unashamedly on life at the heart of Britain's political world.

Yes, the Intercontinental London Westminster is not an obvious art venue. Yet its art curator, Peter Millard, has assembled a collection of provocative works which, taken together, capture the essence of British political life.

Hotels are a chance for messy, untidy humans to enjoy the simplicities of life without any of the complications. So it makes sense that the artworks in the main reception area invoke that everyman anonymity which so many hotel occupiers crave. The space is dominated by a large Tom Clark statue of a faceless worker climbing a ladder. This figure is a builder, but it is not bricks he has hoisted on to his hod. It's the Palace of Westminster itself, a representation of power in the hands

This was David Cameron's first opportunity to bash Ed Balls since the shadow chancellor's autumn statement howler last week. Britain was in for a masterclass in bullying bravado.

It was already an especially rowdy affair. MPs showed their enthusiasm for a fight by the ridiculously over-exaggerated way in which they roared approval for Christopher Pincher, a fairly anonymous Conservative MP. Their cheers as Ed Miliband stood up were, for no particular reason, equally preposterous. It was like those famous-person-enters-in-sitcoms scenario — instant undeserved acclaim. Only in the Commons, the positive nature of the welcome is a little more in doubt.

Ed Miliband made sure the session had a class subtext as he picked up on George Osborne's most controversial remark in last week's autumn statement — that it's not fair that some people have to go to work in the morning while others get a lie-in. Miliband argued, correctly, that the hard workers of Britain are suffering as a result of the