Great excitement in Westminster today over David Cameron’s Nepalese nanny (as a member of James Brokenshire’s metropolitan elite) and whether the Prime Minister had a role in Gita Lima obtaining British citizenship.

At this morning’s lobby briefing, a Number 10 spokesperson was asked whether Cameron had played a role in getting Lima a British passport. The spokesperson replied that they were ‘not aware’ of any involvement from the PM. Now I understand that Number 10 have checked the relevant documents and are shortly to release a statement confirming that the Camerons did not write a letter in support of their nanny’s passport application. Samantha Cameron was simply named as the nanny’s employer on the application form, as is required.

But what this shows is the danger of clever moralising speeches from ministers, be they on immigration, tax, or marriage. They always trigger a hunt for the ‘hypocrite’ among that minister’s colleagues – in this case, those who employ cheap foreign labour, which Brokenshire appeared to be criticising yesterday. Perhaps in this case, Brokenshire’s speech was awkward for Cameron because relations between Number 10 and the Home Office are so bad that its content wasn’t flagged as being a potential problem.

Tags: David Cameron, Immigration, Number 10, UK politics