DOWNING Street has played down questions about the mounting speculation as to the identities of the two mystery figures allegedly involved in a secret No 10 love affair.
The internet has been awash with rumours about who they could be.
Asked if David Cameron had concerns there might be security implications because of the alleged affair, his spokesman replied: "I'm conscious there's a lot of speculation around unnamed individuals but I have no further comment to make on that." He denied the PM had held "crisis talks" over the matter.
Mr Cameron was said to have been stunned when he was told the identities of the two supposed lovers and "immediately realised the importance of the story". A source said: "This revelation is dynamite. None of us could believe it when we first heard it, then we just thought – what a complete mess."
The PM and his aides were said to have discussed the potential fallout should the details ever be made public.
The alleged affair, which is believed to have been revealed to the PM during the past few weeks, is also said to have caused "great personal distress to innocent parties". Legal reasons mean no details of the alleged relationship have been disclosed but it has been suggested those reputedly involved are middle-aged and that the affair has now ended.
No current Cabinet member is believed to have been involved but it is said the alleged affair could be as publicly shocking as that between former Tory premier John Major and ex-minister Edwina Currie.
Nonetheless, the mounting speculation might have serious political implications. Because of the absence of details, it is not possible to know if there could be any security or policy implications resulting from the alleged Downing Street affair.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article