Labour is urging the government to publish its assessments of Suella Braverman’s security breach following her controversial reappointment as home secretary just six days after she was forced out.
He has so far resisted demands to launch an inquiry after she shared a sensitive document with a Tory backbencher from a personal email without permission.
Both Labour and the Liberal Democrats have raised “national security” concerns over the breach, as well as called for a Cabinet Office probe.
Labour will try to push ministers to share risk assessments of this and other alleged leaks, as well as the information given to Mr Sunak before he reinstalled her at the Home Office, with a “humble address” motion in Parliament.
Ms Braverman has so far refused to appear before MPs to explain the circumstances surrounding what happened.
More on Suella Braverman
Related Topics:
Shadow Home Secretary Yvette Cooper said: “Rishi Sunak and Suella Braverman cannot keep running away from these questions. It is far too serious for that, and raises serious doubts about the prime minister’s judgment.
“People need to know they can trust the Home Secretary with highly sensitive information and our national security. Rishi Sunak’s decision to reappoint Suella Braverman was deeply irresponsible.
Advertisement
“Labour will use every parliamentary mechanism open to force government to come clean over her reappointment, to get answers and to require detailed documents to be released to the Intelligence & Security Committee.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
3:24
Why is Braverman’s appointment causing a stir?
Ms Braverman resigned from her post just over a week ago after using her personal email address to forward sensitive government documents, breaking the rules that ministers have to abide by.
But the new prime minister put her back into the Home Office on Tuesday, and stood by the decision after being pressed on it in the Commons on Wednesday.
Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer has called for the home secretary to be sacked and accused Mr Sunak of brokering a “grubby deal trading security for support” in the Tory leadership contest, which he won after receiving Ms Braverman’s backing.
But Mr Sunak has insisted the home secretary has “learned from her mistake” and that he does not regret his decision to reappoint her – despite some Conservative MPs adding their voices to the backlash.
Conservative MP Caroline Nokes said there were “big questions hanging over this whole issue” and backed opposition calls for an inquiry, while former Tory chairman Sir Jake Berry described the breach as “really serious”.
Shadow foreign secretary David Lammy called for a full investigation into Ms Braverman’s actions and for her to be sacked, telling Sky News: “The home secretary is the most serious job you could have in our state.
“This is a person who makes judgements about terrorism and counter-terrorism, who makes judgements about very, very serious offenders, whether they should be allowed out of prison, and for that reason, it’s someone who, I’m afraid, judgement is critically important.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:06
Labour: Braverman’s position ‘fragile’
“I’m afraid this is a lapse of judgement that, quite rightly, she was sacked for. The question is, why was she brought back?”
Dubbed “Leaky Sue”, Ms Braverman was reportedly previously investigated by government officials after the leaking of a story involving the security services.
The Daily Mail reported that MI5 played a role in the inquiry after the leak at the time Ms Braverman was attorney general sparked “concern” in the security service.
The UK is on a “slippery slope towards death on demand”, according to the justice secretary ahead of a historic Commons vote on assisted dying.
In a letter to her constituents, Shabana Mahmood said she was “profoundly concerned” about the legislation.
“Sadly, recent scandals – such as Hillsborough, infected blood and the Post Office Horizon – have reminded us that the state and those acting on its behalf are not always benign,” she wrote.
“I have always held the view that, for this reason, the state should serve a clear role. It should protect and preserve life, not take it away.
“The state should never offer death as a service.”
On 29 November, MPs will be asked to consider whether to legalise assisted dying, through Kim Leadbeater’s Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
14:46
Minister ‘leans’ to assisted dying bill
Details of the legislation were published last week, including confirmation the medicine that will end a patient’s life will need to be self-administered and people must be terminally ill and expected to die within six months.
Ms Mahmood, however, said “predictions about life expectancy are often inaccurate”.
Advertisement
“Doctors can only predict a date of death, with any real certainty, in the final days of life,” she said. “The judgment as to who can and cannot be considered for assisted suicide will therefore be subjective and imprecise.”
Under the Labour MP’s proposals, two independent doctors must confirm a patient is eligible for assisted dying and a High Court judge must give their approval.
The bill will also include punishments of up to 14 years in prison for those who break the law, including coercing someone into ending their own life.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
However, Ms Mahmood said she was concerned the legislation could “pressure” some into ending their lives.
“It cannot be overstated what a profound shift in our culture assisted suicide will herald,” she wrote.
“In my view, the greatest risk of all is the pressure the elderly, vulnerable, sick or disabled may place upon themselves.”
Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, who put forward the bill, said some of the points Ms Mahmood raised have been answered “in the the thorough drafting and presentation of the bill”.
“The strict eligibility criteria make it very clear that we are only talking about people who are already dying,” she said.
“That is why the bill is called the ‘Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill’; its scope cannot be changed and clearly does not include any other group of people.
“The bill would give dying people the autonomy, dignity and choice to shorten their death if they wish.”
In response to concerns Ms Mahmood raised about patients being coerced into choosing assisted death, Ms Leadbeater said she has consulted widely with doctors and judges.
“Those I have spoken to tell me that they are well equipped to ask the right questions to detect coercion and to ascertain a person’s genuine wishes. It is an integral part of their work,” she said.
In an increasingly fractious debate around the topic, multiple Labour MPs have voiced their concerns.
In a letter to ministers on 3 October, the Cabinet Secretary Simon Case confirmed “the Prime Minister has decided to set aside collective responsibility on the merits of this bill” and that the government would “therefore remain neutral on the passage of the Bill and on the matter of assisted dying”.
“Immediate action” is being taken after blueprints of jail layouts were shared online.
The maps detailing the layouts of prisons in England and Wales were leaked on the dark web over the past fortnight, according to The Times.
The detailed information is said to include the locations of cameras and sensors, prompting fears they could be used to smuggle drugs or weapons into prisons or help inmates plan escapes.
Security officials are now working to identify the source of the leak and who might benefit from the details.
The Ministry of Justice did not disclose which prisons were involved in the breach.
A government spokesperson said in a statement: “We are not going to comment on the specific detail of security matters of this kind, but we are aware of a breach of data to the prison estate and, like with all potential breaches, have taken immediate action to ensure prisons remain secure.”
The leak comes amid a chronic prison overcrowding crisis, which has led to early release schemes and the re-categorising of the security risks of some offenders to ease capacity pressures.
The UK will “set out a path” to lift defence spending to 2.5% of national income in the spring, the prime minister has said, finally offering a timeframe for an announcement on the long-awaited hike after mounting criticism.
Sir Keir Starmer gave the date during a phone call with Mark Rutte, the secretary general of NATO, in the wake of threats by Moscow to target UK and US military facilities following a decision by London and Washington to let Ukraine fire their missiles inside Russia.
There was no clarity though on when the 2.5% level will be achieved. The UK says it currently spends around 2.3% of GDP on defence.
A spokeswoman for Downing Street said that the two men “began by discussing the situation in Ukraine and reiterated the importance of putting the country in the strongest possible position going into the winter”.
They also talked about the deployment of thousands of North Korean soldiers to fight alongside Russia.
“The prime minister underscored the need for all NATO countries to step up in support of our collective defence and updated on the government’s progress on the strategic defence review,” the spokeswoman said.
“His government would set out the path to 2.5% in the spring.”
The defence review will also be published in the spring.
While a date for an announcement on 2.5% will be welcomed by the Ministry of Defence, analysts have long warned that such an increase is still well below the amount that is needed to rebuild the armed forces after decades of decline to meet growing global threats from Russia, an increasingly assertive China, North Korea and Iran.
They say the UK needs to be aiming to hit at least 3% – probably higher.
With Donald Trump returning to the White House, there will be significantly more pressure on the UK and other European NATO allies to accelerate increases in defence spending.