The government’s battle with the civil service has escalated this morning with the departure of Sir Philip Rutnam as Home Office permanent secretary. Rutnam has quit the role following a fortnight of negative coverage and briefings over his strained working relationship with Priti Patel. Announcing his decision, Rutnam blamed a ‘vicious and orchestrated briefing campaign’ against him for forcing him into this decision. He says he believes the Home Secretary played a role in this:
‘I had been the target of a vicious and orchestrated briefing campaign. It has been alleged that I have briefed the media against the Home Secretary. This, along with many other claims, is completely false. The Home Secretary categorically denied any involvement in this campaign to the Cabinet Office. I regret I do not believe her. She has not made the efforts I would expect to disassociate herself from the comments.’
Rutnam has no plans to go quietly. He will now take legal action against the government alleging unfair dismissal. The senior civil servant refused a settlement so his case will likely be played out publicly in the courts. In a hint of what we should expect that to bring up, Rutnam’s statement was not just aimed at making the case that he has been treated unfairly – it also saw him move to harm Patel’s position as Home Secretary. Following news reports that Patel is alleged to have bullied staff (a claim she denies), Rutnam lists allegations he received against her: ‘I have received allegations that her conduct has included shouting and swearing, belittling people, making unreasonable and repeated demands, behaviour that created fear and needed some bravery to call out.’
When it comes to Rutnam and Patel’s relationship, the pair clashed over a range of issues but it ultimately came down to the Home Secretary’s belief that her most senior civil servant was obstructive. They previously clashed over an announcement that the police would be allowed to carry tasers. Rutnam’s departure will not be a source of sadness for many in government. He was one of three permanent secretaries named in a report on No. 10’s ‘hit list’ of civil servants viewed to be problematic. After the Windrush scandal, several ministers also questioned his position. Allies of Amber Rudd blamed Rutnam for dud advice from officials the then Home Secretary received which led to her resignation later down the line.
So, what does this mean for Patel’s position? Earlier this week, the Prime Minister’s spokesman said he had ‘full confidence’ in the Home Secretary. Patel’s agenda in the Home Office – an agenda that she clashed with Rutnam on – is one that is shared by No. 10. But the manner in which this has played out will cause alarm in Downing Street. Even though this government holds deep reservations about the civil service and how Whitehall operates, the public nature of this row is viewed as undesirable. This week, the Prime Minister attempted to put a lid on the feud with Patel and Rutnam issuing a joint statement casting doubt on reports about their working relationship. Patel may be relieved to a degree that Rutnam has now left the role. However, if the Home Secretary’s remaining civil servants turn against her, her job will become even harder in the months to come.
Now listen to analysis from Katy Balls and Fraser Nelson on the Coffee House Shots podcast:
Comments