DESPITE hardly being a new concept – and usually lasting no longer than a short holiday – it’s amazing the fuss paternity leave still has the capacity to whip up.

David Cameron’s announcement that he’ll be the first prime minister in history to take such a break is a case in point.

Fair enough, he’s running the country, which is not something even the most high-flying of dads are often grappling with.

But the hoo-ha over his two weeks off in some ways echoes how the phenomenon is treated in offices up and down the country.

In Cameron’s case, the timing of his new daughter’s arrival has apparently thrown into disarray plans surrounding his attendance (or not) at the TUC Congress.

Let’s put aside the implication that it was terribly inconsiderate of Samantha Cameron not to hang on a bit longer so the little girl’s birth was bang on schedule.

What stands out is the begrudging tone detectable in some commentators’ references to this – as if two weeks off makes the blindest bit of difference to . . . well, anything.

I can think of virtually no scenario in the workplace (yep, Cameron’s included) where a man’s presence would be more important than at home.