Some of Britain’s highest-ranking officials said yesterday that they supported the devastating attack on Gordon Brown by Lord Turnbull, the former head of the Civil Service, who accused him of “Stalinist ruthlessness”.

The Times can disclose that Sir Gus O’Donnell, the current Cabinet Secretary, and other Whitehall heads are discussing Mr Brown’s style of government and whether and how it might be changed if he enters No 10. The Chancellor delivers his last Budget today battered by the revolt by officials, fears of rising mortgages, the worst inflation figures since 1991 and with one poll suggesting that David Cameron’s lead would stretch to 15 points if Mr Brown were prime minister.

Half a dozen acting permanent secretaries and even more who are retired have voiced concerns about Mr Brown’s manner. Peter Riddell reveals on page 6 that they are planning informal contacts with the Brown circle to avoid his Treasury style being adopted in No 10.

Mr Brown will fight back with his eleventh Budget. The Times has learnt that he will announce an extra £80 million for the security services, about £400 million for Iraq and Afghanistan and as much as £1 billion for child poverty.

As the Conservatives taunted the Chancellor with claims that he was having “the week from hell”, Sir Stephen Wall, Tony Blair’s long-time adviser on Europe, entered the fray, even questioning whether Labour should elect Mr Brown as prime minister in the summer. The Chancellor is seen as almost certain to succeed Tony Blair – all the more so as any challengers will have only three days from the day of Mr Blair’s resignation to mobilise support for a six-week contest.

The Chancellor was under pressure before the surprise intervention of Lord Turnbull, who stunned colleagues with the ferocity of his attack, after the latest poll suggested that David Cameron would have a big lead over a Brown-led Labour party at the next election.

Then came the surprise news yesterday that the traditional measure of inflation, the retail price index, rose to 4.6 per cent, up 0.4 per cent on the previous month, the worst figure for almost 16 years.

Lord Turnbull had suggested that Mr Brown belittled ministers, treated colleagues with “complete contempt”, shirked unpopular decisions and disappeared at difficult moments for the Government. Reacting to the claims, a former top Treasury official who declined to be named told The Times: “Gordon Brown is a man of great strengths and some weaknesses. He has great drive and determination. But he is a difficult man to work with. If he is in a small group he will impose his views on others. He has developed a working style to try to avoid debate.”

A serving senior mandarin who insisted on anonymity told The Times: “Sir Andrew is right about the Treasury. Gordon’s contempt for others outside a small group in the Treasury is very worrying for those at No 10.”

But ministers and No 10 sprang to Mr Brown’s defence. Mr Blair let it be known that he regarded Lord Turnbull’s action as unacceptable from someone who had once criticised former civil servants for attacking in their memoirs those they had served. David Blunkett, the former Home Secretary, said that although they had had some “hum-dinger” rows Mr Brown was a clear-minded leader who expected others to be on top of their subject. Writing in The Sun, Mr Blunkett said that ministers who knew where they were going and had a clear idea of how to get there could get on with the Chancellor extremely well.

Lord Turnbull, who said in a statement yesterday that he had not intended his remarks to be quoted, had told the Financial Times that Mr Brown had a “very cynical view of mankind and his colleagues.”

On the subject of the Labour succession, Sir Stephen told BBC News 24: “I think the issue here is: is Gordon Brown capable of operating with the trust and transparency that is necessary for good Cabinet government?

“I cannot recall a time – and I was a civil servant for 35 years, including during the Thatcher period, which was a pretty brutal period – when there has been such a lack of open communication between the Treasury and the rest of Whitehall, and that is not good for government.”

Times Recommends

• Times Christmas appeal: Letter from the Editor
• Conferences — what a waste of money
• Schools supremo learns a painful lesson