Whether the home secretary, Suella Braverman, keeps her job is up to the prime minister, Rishi Sunak. That is in keeping with his prerogative powers to organise the composition of the government as he sees fit. But what happens when ministers hardly hide their disagreements or make a habit of defying the norms of behaviour expected of office-holders? That is the place where Ms Braverman seems to be heading – and she’s been there before.
Last October, Ms Braverman was forced to resign as home secretary after confessing to a “technical” breach of the ministerial code. Her departure had been a long time coming. Ms Braverman had publicly contradicted her government’s more liberal stance on immigration. She left office a day before the Truss administration fell. Mr Sunak reappointed Ms Braverman to the Home Office less than a week later. Last December, MPs on the public administration and constitutional affairs committee warned that this dishonourable affair set a “dangerous” precedent: “To allow this to take place does not inspire confidence in the integrity of government, nor offer much incentive to proper conduct in future”. Those words seem prescient given what is happening now, on Mr Sunak’s watch.
This week it emerged that last year, when she was attorney general, Ms Braverman was caught speeding and asked civil servants to help organise a one-to-one driving awareness course so she would not have to appear in a group. They rightly refused, arguing that this was a personal, not a policy, matter. Her request raises the issue of her judgment. But the way this matter is now handled threatens to become one of Mr Sunak’s judgment.
The prime minister will have to decide whether Ms Braverman came clean about what happened at the time – and subsequently. Did she tell Mr Sunak about the incident before she was reappointed home secretary? Why did her special adviser deny the story when asked about it by the Daily Mirror earlier this year? If the prime minister feels Ms Braverman has questions to answer then he should have an inquiry into the affair. This would provide cover for Mr Sunak – who will continue to face questions over the episode – and if nothing too serious emerges, he could deliver a slap on Ms Braverman’s wrist. But her fate is tied more to the current fractious politics of the Conservative party than to her conduct with the civil service. Her department is responsible for net migration, so her call to “get overall immigration numbers down” seems connected to her political ambitions. Ms Braverman’s speech to the National Conservatism conference last week looked like an audition to be party leader.
The home secretary’s rhetoric is an attempt to divert attention from her failure to meet the government’s 2019 pledge to bring down net migration. Profound disagreements on post-Brexit immigration policy have split the Tories. These will be illuminated this week when, on her watch, net migration figures are expected to hit a record high. Cabinet colleagues rightfully see careerism in Ms Braverman’s “authority of the people” bombast. However, her insouciance about the rules ought to make Mr Sunak think twice about a quick reprieve. Ms Braverman prefers politics to be guided by atavistic fears rather than economic self-interest. This lends itself to a competition where those who lie best win. Mr Sunak must surely want better for his party and this country.
Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.
