Skip to content 
Search

Latest Stories

Suing Home Office may not be in Rutnam’s best interests

By Amit Roy

SIR PHILIP RUTNAM, who resigned last Saturday (29) as permanent secretary at the Home Office after clashing with home secretary Priti Patel, said he would be “issuing a claim against the Home Office for constructive dismissal”.


But is this wise?

His critics – and they appear to be growing in number – might express surprise, not that he has resigned, but he wasn’t sacked earlier for allowing the Windrush scandal to fester under his watch.

Many West Indians, who had lived in Britain for most of their lives, were denied medical treatment, even if they had cancer, or were cruelly and wrongly deported to islands they had left as children.

Amber Rudd resigned as home secretary, but she has more or less blamed Rutnam for making himself scarce when the scandal broke and not doing enough to help her. Will she give evidence against Rutnam before an employment tribunal? Will the West Indians, whose lives have been blighted, also speak out against the man who apparently did nothing to anticipate or forestall the shameful incident?

Perhaps the modern version of Sir Humphrey Appleby from cult TV show Yes Minister simply didn’t like taking orders from an Indian woman he considered his intellectual and social inferior. In his resignation statement, stage-managed before TV cameras to cause maximum damage to the home secretary, he said he had “encouraged her to change her behaviours”.

That was magnanimous of him (though I am not sure why he used the plural when ‘behaviour’ would have sufficed). Silly girl, he seemed to be implying, she wasn’t doing as she was told.

The Labour party, the civil service unions and other former and present permanent secretaries will back Rutnam, to be sure, but not everyone thinks that his track record is unblemished.

According to the Sunday Telegraph, “sources close to her predecessor Amber Rudd point out that Sir Philip, 54, did have ‘a remarkable ability to rub home secretaries up the wrong way’”.

Those sources might not be a million miles removed from Rudd herself. Rutnam was described as “quite cunning” and at times “purposefully opaque”.

A Home Office insider also told the paper: “He seemed to think Priti was stupid and treated her as such. Suffice to say it didn’t go down well.”

Rutnam was described as being “a bit Sir Humphreyish, sneaky and a little snivelling”.

The paper added: “There is also the small matter of the review into the Windrush deportation scandal to consider.”

The Sun, too, doesn’t seem to be a great fan of Rutnam. It recalls he told MPs two months ago: “I’m not an expert on the immigration system.”

It reveals that the £190,000 a year head of the Home Office, “who presided over the Windrush scandal, was handed “a lump sum of between £15,000 and £20,000 in April”, as a “performance-related bonus last year”.

Rutnam won’t be pleased to read the Mail’s assessment that he was “lucky not to have been axed on numerous occasions.

“For those who have kept a keen eye on Whitehall over the past decade, the name Rutnam is a byword for bungled advice and toxic clashes with ministers. Dubbed ‘Sir Calamity’ by exasperated Downing Street officials, Rutnam... always seemed to be ‘missing’ when his neck was on the line.”

Priti has her enemies, though Theresa Villiers, the former environment secretary, called her a “highly effective home secretary” and said she was “sick of spiteful briefings against women in high public office”.

Maybe Priti is a demanding taskmistress. But Boris Johnson will remove her as home secretary only if he thinks she is not carrying out the government’s manifesto commitments on immigration and policing – and there is so far no sign of that.

Purely on the basis of what we know, I suggested last week that “Rutnam’s future doesn’t look very bright”. But if he is foolhardy enough to go to court, there is no guarantee that what little remains of his reputation won’t be left in tatters.

Many people – especially the suffering West Indians – will wonder whether he deserves to cling on to his gold-plated pension.

More For You

The real challenge isn’t having more parties, but governing a divided nation

Zarah Sultana and Jeremy Corbyn

Getty Images

The real challenge isn’t having more parties, but governing a divided nation

It is a truth universally acknowledged that voters are dissatisfied with the political choices on offer - so must they be in want of new parties too? A proliferation of start-ups showed how tricky political match-making can be. Zarah Sultana took Jeremy Corbyn by surprise by announcing they will co-lead a new left party. Two of Nigel Farage’s exes announced separate political initiatives to challenge Reform from its right, with the leader of London’s Conservatives lending her voice to Rupert Lowe’s revival of the politics of repatriation.

Corbyn and Sultana are from different generations. He had been an MP for a decade by the time she was born. For Sultana’s allies, this intergenerational element is a core case for the joint leadership. But the communications clash suggests friction ahead. After his allies could not persuade Sultana to retract her announcement, Corbyn welcomed her decision to leave Labour, saying ‘negotiations continue’ over the structure and leadership of a new party. It will seek to link MPs elected as pro-Gaza independents with other strands of the left outside Labour.

Keep ReadingShow less
Amol Rajan confronts loss along the Ganges

Amol Rajan at Prayagraj

Amol Rajan confronts loss along the Ganges

ONE reason I watched the BBC documentary Amol Rajan Goes to the Ganges with particular interest was because I have been wondering what to do with the ashes of my uncle, who died in August last year. His funeral, like that of his wife, was half Christian and half Hindu, as he had wished. But he left no instructions about his ashes.

Sooner or later, this is a question that every Hindu family in the UK will have to face, since it has been more than half a century since the first generation of Indian immigrants began arriving in this country. Amol admits he found it difficult to cope with the loss of his father, who died aged 76 three years ago. His ashes were scattered in the Thames.

Keep ReadingShow less
One year on, Starmer still has no story — but plenty of regrets

Sir Keir Starmer

Getty Images

One year on, Starmer still has no story — but plenty of regrets

Do not expect any parties in Downing Street to celebrate the government’s first birthday on Friday (4). After a rocky year, prime minister Sir Keir Starmer had more than a few regrets when giving interviews about his first year in office.

He explained that he chose the wrong chief of staff. That his opening economic narrative was too gloomy. That choosing the winter fuel allowance as a symbol of fiscal responsibility backfired. Starmer ‘deeply regretted’ the speech he gave to launch his immigration white paper, from which only the phrase ‘island of strangers’ cut through. Can any previous political leader have been quite so self-critical of their own record in real time?

Keep ReadingShow less
starmer-bangladesh-migration
Sir Keir Starmer
Getty Images

Comment: Can Starmer turn Windrush promises into policy?

Anniversaries can catalyse action. The government appointed the first Windrush Commissioner last week, shortly before Windrush Day, this year marking the 77th anniversary of the ship’s arrival in Britain.

The Windrush generation came to Britain believing what the law said – that they were British subjects, with equal rights in the mother country. But they were to discover a different reality – not just in the 1950s, but in this century too. It is five years since Wendy Williams proposed this external oversight in her review of the lessons of the Windrush scandal. The delay has damaged confidence in the compensation scheme. Williams’ proposal had been for a broader Migrants Commissioner role, since the change needed in Home Office culture went beyond the treatment of the Windrush generation itself.

Keep ReadingShow less
Eye Spy: Top stories from the world of entertainment

Ed Sheeran and Arijit Singh

Eye Spy: Top stories from the world of entertainment

Ed Sheeran and Arijit Singh’s ‘Sapphire’ collaboration misses the mark

The song everyone is talking about this month is Sapphire – Ed Sheeran’s collaboration with Arijit Singh. But instead of a true duet, Arijit takes more of a backing role to the British pop superstar, which is a shame, considering he is the most followed artist on Spotify. The Indian superstar deserved a stronger presence on the otherwise catchy track. On the positive side, Sapphire may inspire more international artists to incorporate Indian elements into their music. But going forward, any major Indian names involved in global collaborations should insist on equal billing, rather than letting western stars ride on their popularity.

  Ed Sheeran and Arijit Singh

Keep ReadingShow less