Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free
Roula Khalaf, Editor of the FT, selects her favourite stories in this weekly newsletter.
The ministerial career of Suella Braverman, home secretary, was hanging by a thread on Thursday after she defied prime minister Rishi Sunak by launching an attack on the police which was “not cleared” by Number 10.
Braverman did not apologise and the prime minister was under fierce pressure from Tory MPs to sack her. One minister close to Sunak said: “She will be sacked in the reshuffle. She has no troops.”
Downing Street declined to comment on speculation among Tory MPs that Braverman’s job could be on the line in a wider and long-awaited cabinet reshuffle which could happen as early as next week.
The tense stand-off followed the publication of an article by Braverman criticising the Metropolitan Police over its handling of protests, notably this weekend’s pro-Palestinian demonstration in London.
Braverman accused the police of having a “double standard” and took a tougher stance with rightwing demonstrations, claiming that senior police officers “played favourites”.
Downing Street issued a rebuke to the home secretary, who is widely seen by Tory MPs to be manoeuvring for a future party leadership bid, saying that the article in The Times newspaper “was not cleared by Number 10”.
The ministerial code holds that the “policy content and timing” of all speeches, press releases and initiatives should be cleared with Number 10 at least 24 hours in advance.
But allies of Braverman insisted that she had no reason to apologise, arguing that her provocative article did not contain any new announcement and did not contradict government policy.
In a sign of the tensions between the premier and his home secretary, Downing Street insiders said Number 10 requested changes to the article which were “not minor” but that Braverman did not comply.
Sunak was cloistered with senior advisers, including his deputy Oliver Dowden, on Thursday to discuss a possible reshuffle, according to senior Tories. Downing Street and Dowden declined to comment.
One question facing Downing Street is whether any ministerial shake-up takes place before or after a key Supreme Court ruling next Wednesday, which will determine if Braverman’s flagship plan to deport asylum seekers to Rwanda is legal.
A rightwing Tory insider supportive of Braverman claimed that the changes demanded by Number 10 to her article were “not material” to the substance of the piece and insisted that her stance was in line with the views of the British public, citing a poll released on Thursday.
The YouGov survey for Sky News showed that 50 per cent of Britons thought the pro-Palestinian march planned for Armistice Day this Saturday should be banned, while only 34 per cent thought it should be allowed to go ahead.
Many Tory MPs want Sunak to fire Braverman. “Half the party has told the PM to sack her,” said one former cabinet minister. Dowden, Kemi Badenoch, trade secretary, and Robert Jenrick, immigration minister, are among those tipped by Tory MPs to replace her.
Another senior Tory MP said: “That is absolutely a sackable offence. It’s putting two fingers up to the prime minister. I assume she’s trying to get sacked and I hope she succeeds.”
Conservative backbenchers also accused Braverman of stoking tensions at the protests. “Suppose something terrible happens over the weekend — there’s serious violence at the march — there’s a case to be made that she, as home secretary, has contributed to that,” said one.
Her comments, the latest in a line of highly controversial statements, were condemned by Labour’s shadow home secretary, Yvette Cooper, who said Braverman was “out of control”.
The home secretary’s article reflected her frustration with Sir Mark Rowley, Met police commissioner, who has refused to bow to political pressure to ban the proposed pro-Palestinian march on Saturday.
Rowley, who met the prime minister on Wednesday, has argued that there are no legal grounds to ban the march. Sunak and Braverman claim it is disrespectful because it will take place on Armistice Day.
“Unfortunately, there is a perception that senior police officers play favourites when it comes to protesters,” Braverman wrote.
“During Covid, why was it that lockdown objectors were given no quarter by public order police yet Black Lives Matters [sic] demonstrators were enabled, allowed to break rules and even greeted with officers taking the knee?
“Rightwing and nationalist protesters who engage in aggression are rightly met with a stern response yet pro-Palestinian mobs displaying almost identical behaviour are largely ignored, even when clearly breaking the law.”
Braverman also provoked fury in the same article when she compared what she called “hate marchers” participating in weekly pro-Palestinian protests to sectarian groups that stage marches in Northern Ireland.
Credit: Source link