I don’t get this. The Evening Standard is reporting that the Home Secretary, David Blunkett, is
not the father of his lover’s child with the headline Blunkett Baby Shock. I find this perplexing. Just why is it news? Surely it would be more newsworthy if Blunkett were the father. Is it just more in the Standard’s long running campaign to rubbish the government or what? Or has Blunkett, for some reason which I also cannot fathom, been claiming that he is the father and, if so, why? Does it really matter one way or the other? Probably not.
Posted 23 November 2004, 19:53 GMT