MPs have demanded the Cabinet Secretary answer detailed questions behind “alleged breaches of security” by Suella Braverman, piling fresh pressure on Rishi Sunak over the controversy.
A powerful Commons committee has written to Simon Case – and to the prime minister himself – after Mr Sunak failed to deny the top civil servant’s advice was ignored before the home secretary was reappointed.
“What established processes are available to the Cabinet Secretary for dealing with alleged breaches of security by ministers?” one question asks.
A second demands to know: “Following completion of the investigation, what is the form of the advice provided to the Prime Minister by the Cabinet Secretary on the appropriate action?”
The move could – as revealed by The Independent – even lead to a full inquiry by the public administration and constitutional affairs committee into what Mr Case told Mr Sunak.
“Depending on your response, the Committee may wish to pursue this issue further,” the letter, sent by the committee’s Conservative chair William Wragg, reads.
Before Ms Braverman was accused of ignoring advice to avoid “wretched” overcrowding at the Manston asylum seeker centre, she was under pressure over her earlier breach of the ministerial code.
The home secretary was sacked by Liz Truss for releasing sensitive information from a personal email about plans to loosen immigration rules – but was brought back by Mr Sunak six days later.
The Cabinet Secretary was reported to be “livid” and Mr Sunak – at the Commons dispatch box – failed to deny that his advice not to reappoint Ms Braverman was ignored.
The prime minister has been accused of a “grubby deal” to send the arch-right winger to the Home Office, in return for her support get him to No 10 and defeat Boris Johnson’s challenge.
Standing outside No 10, in his first words as prime minister, Mr Sunak had promised the country: “This government will have integrity, professionalism and accountability at every level.”
Mr Case has been dragged into the Braverman controversy ahead of a Commons vote to try to force the government to reveal all the relevant security and risk assessments on the home secretary.
Senior Tories have echoed Labour fears, Caroline Nokes, a former Tory home office minister, saying “big questions” about Ms Braverman’s return must be cleared up.
Mark Pritchard, a former Conservative member of parliament’s intelligence and security committee, said: “MI5 need to have confidence in the Home Secretary – whoever that might be.”
The questions posed to Mr Case by the public administration are:
* What established processes are available to the Cabinet Secretary for dealing with alleged breaches of security by ministers?
* What is the investigation process, who is involved in such investigations, and what is your assessment of the effectiveness of these procedures?
* Following completion of the investigation, what is the form of the advice provided to the Prime Minister by the Cabinet Secretary on the appropriate action? Who is usually consulted to advise the Prime Minister on the appropriateness of that action?
* Where a minister is found to have breached security, what assessments are undertaken to assess the risk of any future breaches? Who is charged with making this assessment?
* What processes exist for the Cabinet Secretary and other civil servants advising the Prime Minister to record their advice and any views they may have on the Prime Minister’s subsequent actions in response to the alleged breach?
* What published protocols or procedural advice exist covering these processes and where may copies of them be obtained?
