Isabel Hardman

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.

Nick Clegg spent this morning singing the Lib Dem equivalent of Take That's Back for Good, telling his target voters from the teaching profession that whatever one of his colleagues had said or did, they didn't mean it. The Deputy Prime Minister was trying to apologise for comments by Vince Cable, who had rather clumsily underlined a valid point he was trying to make about the need for better careers advice in schools by suggesting that teachers 'know absolutely nothing about the world of work'. 'I know that Vince did not intend to offend teachers,' pleaded the Deputy Prime Minister on his LBC radio show. He then described the profession as the 'lifeblood of society', which could risk offending those carrying out other worthy public services such as nursing, but never mind.

So much of the education debate is about how UK schools perform relative to those in other countries – this week Liz Truss reported back from her visit to Shanghai – so when MPs on the Education Select Committee grilled Andreas Schleicher, the Deputy Director of the OECD which ranks education systems worldwide, they were keen to find out what his data suggests is causing the gap in performance between children in UK schools and those in cities such as Shanghai and countries such as Singapore. Schleicher made a number of interesting points about our education system which are worth mulling: 1. Even the vast improvements in London schools haven't brought them up to the standard of far east education systems.

It was clear from William Hague's statement in the Commons just now that no decisions have been taken on what to do about Ukraine. The Foreign Secretary had already distanced himself from that photographed document when he faced MPs at Foreign Office Questions a little earlier this morning, saying that it didn't necessarily reflect the action the government would take. The government's options 'remain open', he said. It's worth considering Labour's response to the situation.

Sajid Javid isn't the only observer of Russia's behaviour over the situation in Ukraine to link Vladimir Putin's aggression to the situation in Syria. Perhaps the West's decision not to intervene in that conflict has given Putin the sense that he can do what he wants without any response from other countries. But Javid's suggestion in a tweet this afternoon that there is a 'direct link between Miliband's cynical vote against Syria motion and Russia's actions on Ukraine. Completely unfit to lead Britain' goes rather further than that. It also doesn't fit particularly comfortably with the fact that 30 of Javid's own Conservative colleagues rebelled on that motion and many more abstained. His colleague Nick Boles has made a similar point: https://twitter.

Nigel Farage likes to argue he's not a normal politician. He says what he thinks and what other people think too. He certainly didn't do what other politicians are trying to do ahead of the European elections, which is expectation management. Instead, he set the bar pretty darn high for Ukip, telling his party's spring conference in Torquay that 'we can cause an earthquake on May 22nd by winning the European elections', adding 'if we top those polls, it will then give us the momentum to drive us forward to the general election a year after that'. He has set Ukip a big challenge there because if the party doesn't come first, then regardless of how well the Tories do, they can deflect the attention onto Ukip.