Suella Braverman survives to resign another day

It was obvious, when Rishi Sunak took more than two days to “avail himself of the information” about the home secretary’s speeding offence, that he did not want to ask for a formal investigation.

Fortunately, Sir Laurie Magnus, the independent adviser on ministerial interests, agreed that “further investigation is not necessary”. And so, with the lightest non-apology apology (“I apologise for the distraction this has caused”), Suella Braverman survives to resign another day.

She provided a detailed defence today of her lesser offence of asking civil servants to help her arrange a private speed awareness course – she wanted to do it in person, but there were security complications with her police protection, she said.

But she said nothing about the more serious breach of rules by her special adviser, who appeared to mislead journalists by saying “there is nothing like that” when asked if the home secretary had been done for speeding.

But Sunak calculates that public opinion will fail to catch fire over the principle that ministers are responsible for everything special advisers say on their behalf. This was confirmed at Prime Minister’s Questions, when Keir Starmer resorted to jokes at Braverman’s expense – asking about immigration, he said she has “a problem coping with points-based systems” – rather than trying to contest Sunak’s decision to let her off.

When the story was first reported in the Sunday newspapers, it seemed that Sunak might use it as an excuse to rid himself of a troublesome home secretary. It had been understandable, as a matter of crude politics, that he needed her in his cabinet when he first became prime minister in October. His overriding priority then was to stabilise the fractious Conservative Party. And she had successfully positioned herself as the standard-bearer of the anti-immigration, “national conservatism” wing.

It appears that some of the prime minister’s advisers thought that he could now do without her. But it suits him to keep Braverman in office as a hostage. She can take the blame for failures in the Home Office, of which there will always be many, including Thursday’s immigration figures.

This provides cover for Robert Jenrick, Sunak’s ally, to get on with the important business of trying to stop the boats and to cut the legal immigration numbers in time for the election.

Meanwhile, the hysterical reaction of some Tory MPs to the news that Boris Johnson has been referred by the government’s legal department to the police for additional breaches of coronavirus law confirms the febrile mood in the parliamentary party.

If Braverman had been sacked, the cries of a “witch hunt against the right” would have been so much louder. They might even have been slightly more accurate, because the idea that Johnson is “right wing” is a confusion born of Brexit being a mostly right-of-centre cause – Johnson himself is a liberal Tory, especially on the issue of immigration.

Thus Braverman had to be kept on. The flame of her leadership ambition continues to stay alight. A second resignation for breaking the ministerial code – even if it was condemned as a plot by “the blob” against a true Conservative – would probably have snuffed it out.

She still has the awkward calculation about when to resign on a question of policy, however. She needs to say she wanted to be more restrictive on immigration, but the prime minister wouldn’t let her: that would be the main platform of her leadership campaign to become leader of the opposition if the Tories lose the election.

She can live with Thursday’s immigration figures for the year to December 2022, protesting that she became home secretary only in September. But the next figures in six months’ time will be harder for her to explain away – and by then it may be becoming clear that the promise to “stop the boats” is being broken.

I think she is unlikely to be home secretary at the end of this year.