Sunak stumbles over Braverman's data breaches

The new premier has presented a no-nonsense, there’s-a-serious-job-to-be-done face while talking refreshingly of compassion, integrity and humility.

Yet within his resurrection reshuffle, his opponents have smelt political blood over right-winger Suella Braverman’s return as Home Secretary less than a week after she resigned for breaking the ministerial code.

Her offence was emailing confidential information to a fellow MP but then inadvertently pinging it to a parliamentary staffer. Braverman insisted it was a “technical infringement” but, nonetheless, resigned.

However, Jake Berry, sacked as party chairman by Sunak, suggested there had been “multiple breaches” of security and contradicted her claim that she had “rapidly reported” her mistake and informed Simon Case, saying: “As I understand it, the evidence was put to her and she accepted the evidence, rather than the other way round.”

The Cabinet Secretary was said to be “livid” about the Home Secretary’s reinstatement. During PMQs, Keir Starmer asked about officials’ concerns over Braverman’s return. Sunak conspicuously dodged the question.

Intriguingly, Jeremy Hunt was less than effusive in his support for his colleague when he refused to say if he trusted her with sensitive information.

Stressing how she had apologised for her “mistakes,” the Chancellor argued her return to the frontbench was important for the “stability in the economy” and added: “That’s why the PM has put together a Cabinet of all the talents.”

Of course, some believe a “grubby deal” was done, as the Labour leader described it. That, after Boris Johnson insisted he was “up for it” and began canvassing colleagues to support his glorious return to Number 10, Sunak was trying to eliminate the threat and win over right-wingers.

Did he offer Braverman her old job back or did she ring him to say it would be the price for her support? We may never know.

But, unfortunately for the PM, the case of the resurrected Cabinet minister didn’t end there.

In the Commons, Labour’s Yvette Cooper raised speculation Braverman had previously been investigated for a data leak “relating to the security service” when Attorney-General. In January, The Telegraph reported Braverman sought an injunction to block a BBC story about a spy working for British intelligence.

The Shadow Home Secretary has written to Case, calling for an investigation to establish the “extent of this and other possible security breaches”.

To worsen matters for our newly-minted premier, Tory colleagues have piled in.

Conservative backbencher Mark Pritchard said a “breakdown” in trust between MI5 and Braverman must be “sorted ASAP”. But Downing St stressed Sunak had confidence in Braverman, who had “strong relationships” with security services.

Caroline Nokes, who chairs the Commons Women and Equalities Committee, said there were “big questions hanging over this whole issue” and backed opposition calls for an inquiry.

Then, up popped David Lammy, the Shadow Foreign Secretary, to move things along nicely, insisting: “She should be sacked. There should be a thorough investigation,” and then skilfully drew in the PM; Labour’s main target.

“We certainly should know what advice Rishi Sunak took from the Cabinet Secretary as to whether he should have reappointed her. This is a very, very, very serious case indeed.”

Nadhim Zahawi, the new party Chairman, rallied behind Braverman, insisting she had fessed up, deserved a “second chance” as Home Secretary and the PM was right to give her a shot at “redemption” just six days after she left the Government.

Downing St has confirmed Sunak will “shortly” appoint a new independent ethics adviser, filling a gap left by Johnson and Truss. But, given the damaging Braverman row, one wonders how short “shortly” will be.

It seems clear Sunak returned the Hampshire MP to Cabinet life to ease right-wing anxieties and to try to bring unity to his deeply divided party, knowing, without it, the Tories will lose the 2024 election.

But his decision has put a spoke in the Downing St wheel as the PM seeks to focus minds on economic recovery.

It has been calculated that his decision to delay the Autumn Statement until November 17 could reduce the UK Government’s £35bn financial black hole by as much as £15bn thanks to plunging gas prices and falling bond yield interest rates.

Treasury officials are said to have presented more than 100 options for cutting spending. Hunt previously prepared people for “eye-watering” decisions, thought to be a combination of tax hikes and spending cuts. External events might have mitigated the pain but pain there will be nonetheless.

Among the Chancellor’s options are freezing income tax thresholds for two more years and prolonging the cut in international aid spending. Together, they could shrink that black hole by as much as £10bn.

Then there is the possibility of extending the windfall tax on the energy giants, called for, by among others, Nicola Sturgeon, who yesterday in her first letter to the PM insisted “much more needs to be done” to tackle the cost-of-living crisis, including stumping up more cash for Edinburgh. Naturally.

Tempers about profiteering are predictably running high given Shell’s latest quarterly figures, showing it made another bumper profit of £8bn, bringing the total so far this year to £26bn.

Yet it transpires the oil giant hasn’t paid any windfall tax yet in 2022 because Sunak when Chancellor allowed them to avoid it, if they invested in the North Sea.

The momentum for extending the windfall tax, which could bring in several billions more into Treasury coffers, will only grow up to the November 17 statement.

With pressing matters piled high in his Downing St in-tray, for Sunak, as he begins his journey into the political unknown, it may turn out that becoming prime minister was the easy bit.

Read more by Michael Settle:

There will be no honeymoon for Truss's successor as PM

The UK Government is a disaster zone ... so why hasn't support for independence surged ahead?