David Blunkett: Battle for paternity

A High Court judge has ruled that the paternity case involving the home secretary should proceed immediately.

Blunkett's heavily pregnant former-lover Kimberley Quinn had argued for a postponement due to her ill-health.

However the judge decided that it was in the interests of the two-year-old child, who is at the centre of the dispute, to proceed immediately.

Blunkett, who is spending the weekend in his constituency, said he was "relieved" and said he had not seen the child since August.

The home secretary was named as the father of his ex-lover's two-year-old child in his High Court application for parental access.

Accused

Blunkett has been accused of using his Home Office position to fast-track a visa application for the nanny of the child at the centre of the paternity row. 

As a YouGov poll has found half of voters do not believe Blunkett should resign, the chancellor has given his backing to the home secretary.

"I do not think there is any evidence that he is not doing his job. In fact, he is not being diverted from continuing to do every aspect of his job," Brown said.

But the home secretary faces a tough weekend, with Westminster speculation suggesting he could face more damaging allegations in Sunday newspapers.

Wider inquiry

The Conservatives have reiterated their demands for a wider inquiry into the conduct of the home secretary.

The investigation should be expanded to examine whether civil servants accelerated the application without his knowledge, they said.

New claims over the dispute - including the allegation that John Gieve, the permanent secretary at the Home Office, was involved in the application - have deepened the affair.

Dominic Grieve, the shadow attorney general, said: "It is serious if there is a climate within the government that it is considered normal to provide a special service for ministers, and then the home secretary can wash his hands of it."

Mark Oaten, the Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman, added: "What is becoming increasingly clear is that this particular application had unusual treatment."

Newspaper reports also suggest that 10,000 visa applications could be re-assessed unless the Home Office can prove there were extraordinary reasons to fast-track the nanny's visa.