Rishi Sunak is facing mounting anger from his own MPs for re-hiring Suella Braverman six days after she resigned for a security breach.
Three MPs had spoken out by lunchtime after bombshell fresh claims emerged that she was involved in a leak inquiry almost a year ago.
Last week she resigned for e-mailing a government document to people outside the government, in a double breach of the Ministerial Code.
But Rishi Sunak rehired her to the same job six days later despite pledging “integrity” in government.
A Tory revolt was growing today as No10 refused to say if she was fully security vetted, instead saying all ministers “have the requisite provisions to enable them to do their job”.
Conservative MP Mark Pritchard, a former member of the intelligence and security committee, said: “MI5 need to have confidence in the Home Secretary - whoever that might be.
“It’s a vital relationship of trust, key to the UK’s security and democratic oversight of MI5.
“Any breakdown in that relationship is bad for the security service and the government. It needs to be sorted ASAP.”
Tory MP Caroline Nokes told BBC Radio Solent: "I think what is apparent is that there are big questions hanging over this whole issue.
"And to be frank I would like to see them cleared up so that the home secretary can get on with her job.
“If that means a full inquiry then I think that’s the right thing to do.”
No10 today insisted the Prime Minister was confident that MI5 has confidence in the Home Secretary.
So what happened, according to our sources, and why is it being seen as a big deal? Here’s what you need to know.
What happened last week?
Home Secretary Suella Braverman resigned after she breached security rules by sending an e-mail from her personal account to people outside government.
She sent a draft statement about immigration to her ally, the MP Sir John Hayes, for advice - and accidentally copied in a staffer in the MP Andrew Percy’s office too.
It’s understood the statement was a document with plans that were being drawn up to increase high-skilled and lower so-called ‘low-skilled’ immigration.
Cabinet Secretary Simon Case, the head of the civil service, found two breaches of the Ministerial Code - both relating to the one e-mail.
The first was clause 2.14: Ministers “should ensure that they follow the advice about Security of Government Business.”
The other was 2.3: “The internal process through which a decision has been made, or the level of Committee by which it was taken should not be disclosed.”
It is understood Liz Truss met Ms Braverman, discussed the breach with her and allowed her to resign of her own accord rather than sacking her outright.
What does Suella Braverman claim?
Ms Braverman said in her resignation letter that she sent a draft written ministerial statement “from my personal email to a trusted parliamentary colleague as part of policy engagement”.
She claimed: “As soon as I realised my mistake, I rapidly reported this on official channels, and informed the Cabinet Secretary.”
An ally defended her by telling The Times: “Ministers do this all the time. They use private email and are also WhatsApping documents all the time too.”
She is also said to have claimed she sent the e-mail at 4am.
Meanwhile, allies pointed to a 90-minute “shouting match” she had with Liz Truss the night before she resigned about the immigration policy itself.
In her letter she appeared to suggest this row over policy was part of the reason she quit.
Which of her claims are being disputed and why?
Many of her claims are disputed.
Firstly, insiders claim Ms Braverman was presenting a “red herring” by downplaying the seriousness of her statement. Sacked Tory chairman Jake Berry said it was a “serious” breach.
While true that she sent it to a “trusted colleague” - MP John Hayes - it was also sent to someone in MP Andrew Percy’s office by accident.
Secondly, the sacked Tory chairman suggested it’s misleading that Ms Braverman informed the Cabinet Secretary “as soon as I realised my mistake”.
Jake Berry told TalkTV: “As I understand it, the evidence was put to her and she accepted the evidence, rather than the other way round."
Thirdly, insiders told the Mirror Ms Braverman only sent the e-mail several hours after 4am.
Fourthly, allies of Liz Truss insist the row over the policy itself was unrelated to the PM’s decision that she had to go for a security breach.
How did Suella Braverman end up resigning?
It’s understood Ms Braverman sent the e-mail to MP ally John Hayes, but also by accident to an assistant to the Tory MP Andrew Percy.
Mr Percy’s staffer is thought to have raised concerns with Mr Percy, who then consulted with colleagues and alerted the Chief Whip Wendy Morton.
Ms Morton is then thought to have told the Cabinet Secretary Simon Case, who then is likely to have informed the Prime Minister directly.
At this point Liz Truss pulled in Suella Braverman last Wednesday - but allowed her to go of her own accord.
An insider told the Mirror: “There were contrasting views about what she should be allowed to resign or whether the Prime Minister should sack her.
“The Prime Minister tried to be nice to her and that backfired.”
What is this ‘MI5 probe’ all about?
Meanwhile Labour has demanded a new investigation into claims Ms Braverman was probed by government officials in a leak inquiry in January this year.
A Cabinet Office unit included Ms Braverman in an investigation when she was Attorney General, the Daily Mail revealed. A source told the Mirror the Mail story was accurate.
The leaked information related to her plan to seek an injunction that stopped the BBC naming a spy accused of domestic abuse.
There was said to be “concern” in MI5, which then took on a role in the leak probe. A source told the Mirror: “That went all the way to the top”.
It’s understood the probe found “no conclusive evidence” of who the leaker was and there was a ‘wide field’ of possible candidates.
A source told the Mirror “there were probably about 20 people in the country who knew about this”, so Ms Braverman was “very, very strongly suspected”.
The Mirror has contacted Ms Braverman’s representatives for comment about the Mail story.
What questions does Rishi Sunak have to answer?
Firstly, did his officials - including Simon Case - raise concerns about the return of Ms Braverman? Both Mr Sunak and No10 have refused to deny this.
Secondly, did he cut a deal allowing her to return as Home Secretary in exchange for her support in the Tory leadership contest? No10 have said he first offered her the job after entering No10 but won’t be drawn on private conversations.
Thirdly, did he mislead Parliament? He said: “She raised the matter and she accepted her mistake.”
But former Tory chairman Jake Berry, and a government insider, have both disputed the claim that she raised the matter herself, saying evidence was in fact presented to her.
No10 insisted the PM’s words were accurate but refused to get into “timelines”. A spokesman said it was “hypothetical” to ask if Mr Sunak will correct the record.
Lib Dem Home Affairs Spokesperson Alistair Carmichael said: “It would appear that far from owning up herself, Suella Braverman was caught out after she emailed the wrong person.
“If Rishi Sunak has indeed misled Parliament on this critical issue, he must correct the record immediately.”
Could she be investigated?
Rishi Sunak has committed to installing a new independent advisor on ministerial interests “shortly”.
As the rules stand, that person will only be able to investigate Suella Braverman if Rishi Sunak gives an investigation the go-ahead.
If Mr Sunak gives the advisor the power to start his or her investigations without the PM’s permission, then they could start probing Ms Braverman of their own accord.
No10 has so far refused to say if this will happen.
