Prime Minister Gordon Brown might be having a hard time with women, but there is clearly no glass ceiling in his good friend Sir Alan Sugar’s boardroom.

“The Apprentice” final saw Kate Walsh and Yasmina Siadatan go stiletto-to-stiletto — “You’re the best that I’ve ever had in the final in this boardroom,” said Sugar.

The two 27-year-olds had to come up with a new type of chocolate and develop a marketing campaign for their brand which they had to pitch to advertising, confectionery and retail experts.

Licensing development manager Walsh’s “Choc D’Amour” was the better tasting chocolate but at £13 a pop left Sugar less than impressed.

Restaurateur Siadatan’s “Cocoa Electric” brand was seven pounds cheaper and if the taste of her chocolates clearly left a lot to be desired — one retail buyer said no shopper would come back for another box –  the mass-market pitch she put together had Sugar salivating.

It was enough for the tycoon to raise his finger and point it in Siadatan’s direction and tell her she was hired. Promising Sugar she would be his best ever apprentice, Siadatan will now get the chance to work in his business empire on a 100,000 pounds-a-year salary.

“I’m absolutely up for it,” said Siadatan. “I think Sir Alan knows my qualities, the best way to make use of me.”

That will involve working for Sugar’s Amscreen company, which supplies doctor’s surgeries and hospitals with free-of-charge digital signage units that display adverts and patient messages.

“Yasmina seemed to have that real business instinct, not just in sales or anything like that,” said Sugar. “She’s innovative and understands the plot of where we’re going. It’s gut instinct, I can’t explain it.”

Men had a rough time of it in the 2009 series. Only James McQuillan managed to reach last week’s interview round, but he was fired along with Debra Barr and Lorraine Tighe.

Was Siadatan a worthy winner of “The Apprentice” and what does her and Walsh’s success on the show say about the supposed glass ceiling in business?

Among the surprises last week, as one cabinet minster after another stepped down, was Gordon Brown’s appointment of Sir Alan Sugar as the government’s Enterprise Tsar.

Was this a sound decision, several analysts wondered, or was it a possible case of Brown seeming to confuse the worlds of politics and show business, hoping perhaps that what works in the studio would work just as well in the real world?

The star of the BBC show “The Apprentice” was to be offered a peerage and would take a role as an adviser on matters affecting small and medium-sized businesses.

But the Conservatives are objecting. They say Sugar should not be working for the government and front a TV show at the same time, particularly when the next series of the Apprentice goes out early in 2010 just a few months before a general election. The appointment, they contend, breaches BBC rules on political independence and impartiality.

Sugar himself insists there is no conflict of interest. ‘It’s very simple - all I am is an adviser, I’m not a policymaker,’ he says. ”I have been loyal to Gordon Brown and the Labour Party for quite a while, but I also have my loyalties to the BBC.”

Do you believe Sugar should have been appointed? Or is Gordon Brown perfectly entitled to have who he likes in his government of all the talents, especially someone with such proven business acumen?

“All I can do is advise those that are in charge of making policy from a business point of view … what’s right and what’s wrong,” he told Sky News.

At the moment it looks as if only one person can win this series of BBC One’s “The Apprentice” - and this is Kate Walsh. The 27-year-old is the only candidate with any natural flair for business and has shone in every task. Last night’s episode was no different.

With 10 weeks gone and just six candidates remaining, Sir Alan Sugar decided it was time for “one of my favourite tasks”. In other words, the one that made the wannabe apprentices (and us watching at home) the most uncomfortable. Both teams were then told they would be thrust in front of a camera and expected to sell products on live TV.

Nice-guy Howard took charge of team Ignite, leading Kate and Lorraine Tighe while Yasmina Siadatan wrestled the captaincy of team Empire from Debra Barr and funny-man James Walsh. For once, both teams took to the task rather well.

Allowed to choose the products they would sell, Howard went for expensive items such as a chip-fat fryer, air guitar and a preposterous leather jacket while Debra’s Empire pinned their hopes on shifting bulk amounts of low-end goods, including a poncho and a remote control car.

Bossy Debra, who after raising her voice to Sir Alan and his aides in the boardroom clearly is not scared of anything, was labeled a “natural” as she gave viewers the hard-sell.

The highlight, however, was Kate playing air guitar to Led Zeppelin and “releasing my inner rock goddess.” The TV crew were in stitches, and so was I. Unfortunately for Kate, Lorraine’s attempt to sell satellite navigation systems ended in a pile-up. Comments like “it has got a safety camera for those of you who are speeding around and clocking up lots of points” and “it will save you from having lots of accidents” did not go down well with her producer.

The viewers did not like it either and Howard, Kate and Debra sold just 10 percent of what the channel would expect from their chosen items. They were outsold by Debra, James and Yasmina and would have to face Sir Alan’s wagging finger.

It looked as if Lorraine, whose hopeless performance cost them the task, would be the one to go, especially when in true “Apprentice” fashion her erstwhile teammates turned on her like a pack of wild dogs.

Sir Alan had other ideas. Turning his attention to Howard, he told him he was “risk adverse” and a “Steady Eddie.” In these difficult times, apparently, “ordinary people” are not good enough.

Next week, the candidates face a series of pressurised interviews, always a series high point. Not that any of it matters - this is Kate’s competition to lose.

Four finalists — three losers.

We know what happens to the winner — they go off to work for Alan Sugar on 100,000 pounds-a-year in a rather drab Essex office.

But what do the three losing candidates do after they see the finger raised and hear the words “You’re Fired”.

Previous losers have gone off and pursued media careers, some have gone back to their old jobs while others have taken up different careers.

This year, which is unusual because there are four finalists rather than the normal two, offers a potential mixture of candidates considering retiring to the countryside, running the London marathon, starting a new business and making a possible return to the United States.

When I spoke to them ahead of the final, none said they were contemplating a career on the TV or radio, if they lost.

Claire, the strong favourite to win, told me she has already had a couple of job offers, including a retail role in Hong Kong, which she might consider if she is not hired.

“I definitely want to stay within business,” she added. “I’m not interested in any type of media stuff. It will either be sales or retail based. One of the roles is in Hong Kong setting up a retail division there, so that would be really exciting.

“But I’m almost swinging the other way and am tempted to leave London and move to the country and get a dog, so it’s going to be a change.”

She also said she was running the London Marathon next year, “So help me God”.

“I like sweets and cake and booze too much so it is going to be way harder than ‘The Apprentice’.”

Helene is going to use her increased profile to work and raise money for underprivileged children in schools, whether she wins or loses, before returning to the corporate world if she is fired.

If Lee is fired, he plans to hit the beach before possibly setting up his own business, while Alex is contemplating returning to his earlier work in finance and mortgage broking, or moving back to the U.S.

And who do they want to win — if not themselves?

Claire enthusiastically put forward Helene saying: “I think Sir Alan needs a strong woman in his organisation. Shake up those men in suits. ”

Alex, who worked well with Lee during the tasks, said he had spotted his colleague’s skills early on.

“I immediately thought that guy was going to be competition, you know, not just the initial impression of physical appearance — he’s a big guy — but when you got down to the nitty gritty of the sales and the creativity.”

Who do you think should win out of the four finalists? Or do you think Sugar got it wrong in previous episodes and should have kept one of the other candidates?

The four finalists aren’t that bad really when you meet them.

They, and many of the other candidates, may have come across as back-stabbing bullies during the series, but in a brief meeting with Alex, Lee, Helene and Claire this week, I found them courteous and lucid.

Helene, who did so well in the interviews with Alan Sugar’s business colleagues, again came across as plausible.

Alex remained anonymous — but what a smile, while Claire showed restrained exuberance.

I didn’t ask Lee to do his impression of a reverse pterodactyl, but the decent wide-boy impression he gives on the show seems genuine.

All agreed the 12-week interview process was not too sales-orientated and offered a good indication of a well-rounded employee.

Helene, who did not come from a sales background, said she had the chance to shine in creative tasks such as running a restaurant and designing and marketing a box of tissues.

“I found the tasks particularly difficult because a lot of the emphasis was on sales which is my biggest development need,” she said.

“However, I also think I had the opportunity to shine with my creative side. But I’m in the final with these three, so my lack of sales experience has not been a disadvantage.”

Lee said setting up any business required some element of sales, whether through marketing or word of mouth.

“That is why The Apprentice is focused around it,” he said.

Sugar said the process of recruitment was more effective than sitting across a table and interviewing a candidate once or twice.

“One of the problems with recruiting people is that normally you see them across the table once, maybe twice and possibly a third time at an interview,” he told BBC radio.

“They can have the greatest CVs in the world, they can present themselves brilliantly across the office desk…but you just don’t know the person until they have worked for you for three or four months.”

The candidates argued this series had a strong creative streak, but ultimately, as Helene said, any job is mostly about selling yourself.

“The Apprentice” this week reached one of its regular highlights — the interview stage, when some of Alan Sugar’s business colleagues go through the candidates’ CVs and grill them on their strengths and weaknesses.

This week did not fail to disappoint. But did Sugar?

Was he cunning in his decision to take the unusual step of keeping four in the final, instead of the usual two, or did he just bottle it?

He got rid of “zany” Lucinda, who obviously would not fit in to his kind of organisation. But how can he say the remaining four deserved to go through because they were all good candidates?

These “good candidates” included a man who it was discovered had rather a large discrepancy on his CV and a guy who snitched on Lucinda in the boardroom about her job doubts.

We probably all add a little extra colour to our CVs, but saying you studied for two years when in fact you dropped out after four months is a glaring mistake. 

I can understand Lee may have an academic inferiority complex, but his integrity had been his strength up to then.

Alex’s behaviour just went to form. When he put up his hand and said “Please sir. Lucinda doesn’t want the job” he acted like all his 24 years.

So who does that leave?

Claire who seems unfazed by anything, but is in danger of being insensitive to everything, and the rather unappealing and ineffective Helene.

Now I see why Sugar found it so difficult to choose among them.

After a tired Michael lost the spirit for a fight in the boardroom, what was there left to him?

His boardroom badgering — a mixture of begging, bragging and belligerence – had kept him in the show against all the odds for at least three weeks longer than could have been reasonably expected.

But even he lost the will to go all the rounds this week, resulting in his inevitable exit.

He seemed completely washed out, yawning through the exercise and seemingly unable to sit up straight in his chair in the follow-up show with Adrian Chiles.

This is the man who had pestered would-be brides into buying his wedding cakes and who had chased a businessman down the road in a vain attempt to persuade him to rent a Ferrari.

What happened to that energy?

That was not the only surprise about Michael. The man who said he could fake interest in anything, including passion, was not so fake as we may have been led to think. At the beginning of the task he admitted hating cars and showed no interest or knowledge in the supercharged vehicles.

The only energy he seemed able to muster in the Adrian Chiles show was the malevolent looks he threw Ruth “the Badger” after the former candidate and saleswoman extraordinaire said he should have been kicked out weeks ago.

So it looks like a final between Anonymous Alex and Clanging Claire. There’s no way Sugar would put up with Lucinda in his organisation, despite her coming up with some of the best ideas during the series and being a great team leader.

I admit I have a bit of a soft spot for her (not the hats though). She seems to annoy her team mates while encouraging sympathy among mainly women viewers.

What appears as whingeing to some, appears as victimisation to others — her strengths, ideas and concerns ignored and shunted to the sidelines.

But my views about the group as a whole remain unchanged — this must be the weakest group ever to appear on the Apprentice.

Well, another favourite leaves “The Apprentice”.

First, soldier Simon falls victim to a lack of imagination, then former public schoolboy Raef goes because he went all arty.

Raef, you were just too posh to push the “tacky” tissues.

Tasked with branding and advertising a box of tissues, he couldn’t bring himself to go for slush.

Let’s admit it - Alex’s team won by default with their lurid box and soppy theme. They literally pushed the tissues in people’s faces.

Raef, you just showed too much of the Noel Coward.

So the man with the impeccable manners and appearance bowed out in the most gentlemanly way imaginable.

Needless to say, Michael was at the heart of all the bad decisions.

Sir Alan — Michael HAS to go, and go soon. The man who lies and fawns can’t possibly survive another week, can he?

I’m always amazed that anyone buys anything from the teams on “The Apprentice” - let alone the single most important purchase a woman may buy in her life.

People have bought lollipops, cars and even a wheelchair on the show in the past - but a wedding dress?

Yet daughters and their mothers paid up to 2,500 pounds at a Birmingham bridal fayre.

Admittedly, they bought more flip flops and thongs but, even so, they forked out the money encouraged by sales patter that included comments such as ”that looks gorgeous”and “that suits your colouring”.

The shop from where I bought my wedding dress had a principle of not commenting at all.

It was a bit disconcerting at first, but it ensured the decision was mine and there could be no regrets or recriminations.

The series has reached the stage when we should be able to choose our favourite to become the Apprentice, but I’m finding it easier to say who I don’t want to win.

Helene, who botched up this week’s task yet still managed to get rid of her second scapegoat Sara, has to be among those for her poor tactics and man management.

But ahead of her must be the self-professed “good Jewish boy” Michael who turns out to be only half-Jewish and mixes kosher with halal.

This week he told a bride-to-be that her chosen traditional wedding cake was dull. Nice one.

And Alex the pretty boy must go surely - the man who manages to merge into the background when things begin to go pear-shaped.

 Who’s your favourite - to be hired, or fired.

Jenny has been fired. Rejoice!

Then why did I feel sympathy for the woman whose look was described as a cross between Lady Macbeth and the snake Kaa in “The Jungle Book”?

Well, perhaps not quite sympathy, but a little more patience.

After all, this is the woman who turned on her colleagues in the boardroom, reduced team mates to tears, had the gall to ask for tips despite losing customers’ laundry, came up with the daft idea of an environment greeting card, tried to bribe a shopkeeper and didn’t know the meaning of kosher.

Financial pundit Alvin Hall had it about right when he said she had “distorted the idea of survival”.

But afterwards, as she explained her demonic behaviour on the post-programme analysis with Adrian Chiles, she didn’t criticise her former team mates and even appeared contrite for her brutish behaviour towards Lucinda.

“Miserable,” was how she herself described her callous boardroom tactics.

“I thought I was being shrewd,” she said. “Covering my back. I can’t believe it.”

Aggression can help in the business world, but it can also hinder, she observed.

Am I being soft? Going all American in the face of a public confession?

The other panelists hardly let up.

“You should’ve been fired last week for the environmental card,” columnist Vanessa Feltz told her.

If Alan Sugar wanted to show that integrity and skill wins a deal, he should also have fired Michael.

The 25-year-old telesales executive said he was a “good Jewish boy” on his CV to impress Sugar, but came a cropper when he didn’t know what kosher was during an exercise in Marrakech.

Worse than that, he mixed up kosher with halal.

“I’m only half-Jewish,” Michael later explained.

This time it was Sugar who went soft, going all dreamy-eyed over his own enthusistic youth.