Tory MP alleges Braverman responsible for ‘multiple breaches of ministerial code’

Read More

Rishi Sunak’s decision to reappoint Suella Braverman six days after she was forced to resign for a security breach is facing fresh questions after a former Conservative minister claimed the home secretary was responsible for “multiple breaches of the ministerial code”.

Jake Berry, who was at the heart of Liz Truss’s government, said Braverman was responsible for a “really serious breach” after sending confidential information to a private address, sending it to an MP, attempting to send it to the MP’s wife and then accidentally sending it to a member of parliamentary staff.

He also indicated that the UK’s most senior civil servant, Simon Case, had been consulted and ruled that it had broken the rules.

Sunak told MPs on Wednesday that Braverman had made an “error of judgment” and had recognised her mistake, adding: “That’s why I was delighted to welcome her back into a united cabinet that brings experience and stability to the heart of government.”

Asked during prime minister’s questions if officials had raised concerns about the appointment- given Case was said to have been furious – Sunak simply said he had already “addressed the issue”.

Speaking to Piers Morgan Uncensored on Wednesday night, Berry said there had been “multiple breaches of the ministerial code” after Braverman had sent the document to her confidante and fellow MP Sir John Hayes.

“It was sent from a private email address to another member of parliament,” he told TalkTV’s Kate McCann. “She then sought to copy in that individual’s wife and accidentally sent it to a staffer in parliament. To me, that seems a really serious breach, especially when it was documents relating to cyber security, as I believe. That seems a really serious breach.

“The cabinet secretary had his say at the time, I doubt he changed his mind in the last six days but that is a matter for the new prime minister.”

The disclosure comes after Labour and the Liberal Democrats called for a Cabinet Office inquiry into national security concerns after Braverman was reinstated. No 10 refused to deny officials advised against reappointing her to a great office of state.

Braverman had been in the role six weeks when she said she made a “mistake”, which she conceded was a “technical infringement” of the rules.

The shadow home secretary, Yvette Cooper, wrote to Case demanding an investigation “into the extent of this and other possible security breaches”.

“Given the prime minister’s decision to reappoint her to the cabinet post overseeing national security, it is vital for the public to have transparency on what occurred,” Cooper wrote. “It must include the extent of the home secretary’s use of private email accounts to circulate government papers and the extent to which official documents have been sent outside government.”

The Lib Dems’ home affairs spokesperson, Alistair Carmichael, also called for an inquiry.

“If it is confirmed that Suella Braverman repeatedly broke the ministerial code and threatened national security, she must be sacked. A home secretary who broke the rules is not fit for a Home Office which keeps the rules,” he said.

The head of the FDA senior civil servants’ union, Dave Penman, told the Guardian the reappointment was a clear example of “double standards” given that his members would face severe punishments for similar behaviour.

“If a civil servant had acted in the way that Suella Braverman was alleged to, using private email accounts to send confidential government business to personal contacts, they would rightly be expected to face the harshest of penalties and lose their security clearance.

“Standards matter, and the clear signal from her appointment is that ministers can act with impunity if it suits the prime minister.”

The Labour leader, Keir Starmer, replied during PMQs that a deal had been struck to shore up support from hard-right MPs who support Braverman. “He’s so weak, he’s done a grubby deal trading national security because he was scared to lose another leadership election,” Starmer said.

Braverman left the chamber just minutes before a debate on her conduct after Labour was granted an urgent question.

Cooper said there were many unanswered questions regarding Braverman’s conduct. “Is this the only time she has done this or has she shared other documents? Or other sensitive information?

“What security clearance has the home secretary been given? Does she still have access to the most sensitive documents and information? Did the cabinet secretary warn against her reappointment?”

Replying for the government, the paymaster general, Jeremy Quin, was unable to say whether the home secretary had been given full security clearance. He did, however, say that the government would appoint a new independent ethics adviser.