The PR battle being waged by actress Joanna Lumley on behalf of the Gurkhas appears to have finally outflanked beleaguered Gordon Brown’s government.

It is expected that he will announce this week that any Gurkha soldier, whenever they served, will be eligible to now live in the UK.

This is a u turn of gargantuan proportions and a classic case study example of effective PR winning against all possible reason.

Ms Lumley and her supports have used the media to tug on emotional heartstrings, in the face of overwhelming logic, and won.

Before 2004 no Gurkhas at all could live legally in the UK. This was then changed to allow everyone and their immediate family, who had served a minimum of 15 years in the Gurkhas, to stay on. 

This has now been opened up to potentially around 100,000 Nepalese.

If this rule is now extended to Gurkha for instance that fought in the Second World War their immediate family could conceivable run into dozens of people. None of whom have any greater connection with the UK than their great grandfather once fought for the then British Empire more than 60 years ago. What about the hundreds of thousands of other Imperial troops from India and Africa who also fought? Should they too be allowed residency?

This decision flies squarely in the face of the 1947 tripartite agreement between Nepal, Britain and India - many more Gurkhas serve in the Indian army than in our own – which states the legality of a Gurkha soldier’s status in the British Army: “A Gurkha soldier must be recruited as a Nepali citizen, must serve as a Nepali citizen and must be resettled as a Nepali citizen.” It doesn’t get much clearer than that.

But even such anti immigration vanguards as the Daily Telegraph and Daily Mail have been won over.

Or is it more likely their stance is simply reflected in the view that it’s ok to allow coloured foreigners in as long as they’ve proven their worth to their ‘betters’ remember 90% of Gurkha officers are white.

There is no doubt that a Gurkha’s service should be adequately rewarded. But reward and assimilation are two entirely different things. Gurkha campaigners shy away from the ‘M’ word. But at the end of the day that is what Gurkhas are - mercenaries. They are simply soldiers of one nation in the employ of another for financial gain. And don’t forget that after recent changes to pension arrangements retired Gurkhas are wealthy in comparison to their countrymen.

Today a Gurkha returning home after 15 years service earns more in pension payments than a Nepalese government Minister earns in salary. That is fact. The average wage in Nepal is around £500 a year. A long service recently retired Gurkha will earn this in pension every month.

And what of the impact on the local economy if we encourage ex servicemen to leave their own country. The income retired Gurkhas bring is critical to many poor rural communities.

It is bad enough that being a Gurkha soldier is the number one vocation of choice for young Nepalese males and that they leave in their droves every year.

How is the country ever going to be able to stand and prosper when its fittest and brightest are lured in their thousands every year by the Queen’s Shilling?

Now thanks to these rule changes it is likely the majority will never return.

Honest, intelligent and hard working the next generation of Gurkhas who are allowed to stay here will surely be Britain’s gain. But it will be Nepal’s loss and morally that does not stand up to scrutiny no matter how slick the PR messaging is.