She made a series of inflammatory remarks ahead of some London protests, claiming the police were guilty of having a left-wing bias, and hitting out at “pro-Palestinian mobs” ahead of a wave of right-wing violence in Whitehall.
She was promptly sacked, triggering a major cabinet reshuffle days later.
But, the Home Office published the annual report and accounts for 2023 to 2024 today, and revealed Braverman received the generous “non-taxable exit payment” at the end of last year.
That was the second time Braverman had to resign as home secretary; she was fired by Liz Truss after she breached the ministerial code by sharing an official document from her personal email address with a parliamentary colleague.
Advertisement
She was reappointed six days later when Sunak was in No.10, after the new PM said she had “accepted her mistake”.
A Labour source told HuffPost UK: “The fact that Suella Braverman was able to walk away with a tax-free payout of this size after being sacked for the second time in a year demonstrates how the ministerial severance system was brought into disrepute by the last Tory government, and why it will need to change under Labour.”
Braverman was expected to try and run to be the next Tory leader after Sunak announced he would be stepping down following their historic election defeat.
However, she announced she was withdrawing from it – even though she supposedly had the 10 MPs required to to enter the contest – because the “traumatised” party did not want to listen to her take on why it failed.
Many supporters expected to back her reportedly switched to fellow right-wing Tory Robert Jenrick after the election.
Advertisement
Robert Jenrick is standing to be the next Tory leader
via Associated Press
Jenrick, the former immigration minister under Sunak, resigned from the government last December – but he also received a generous tax-free pay-out, according to the Home Office accounts.
The contest to replace Rishi Sunak as Conservative Party leader has officially begun, as Tories are gradually started to put themselves forward.
After enduring a historic defeat in the general election and walking away with just 121 seats in total, former PM Sunak said he was stepping back from the helm of the party when his successor was chosen.
Advertisement
As the fight for the soul of the party begins, it remains to be seen whether it will end up going for a more centrist figure, or leaning further right.
Here’s who has officially announced their leadership bids, who is expected to – and how long this whole competition is going to go on for…
1. James Cleverly
Shadow home secretary James Cleverly
via Associated Press
The former home secretary (who now shadows the same role) announced his plan to run on Tuesday, a day before nominations actually opened.
Advertisement
Seen as a moderate within the Conservative ranks, he has said the Conservatives need to “re-establish our reputation as the party who, in government, helps grow the economy, helps people achieve their goals, their dream and their aspirations”.
Alluding to the party’s historic loss at the ballot box, he said: “We must ditch the self-indulgent infighting and be ready to deliver when the next chance comes.”
According to a Savanta poll shared with Sky News, Cleverly has a net favourability of -9 with the general public.
He held several ministerial jobs under Boris Johnson before being appointed as the education secretary at the end of the ex-PM’s premiership.
He was foreign secretary for both Liz Truss and Sunak, and home secretary from November 2023 and July 2024.
Advertisement
2. Tom Tugendhat
Shadow security minister Tom Tugendhat
Anadolu via Anadolu via Getty Images
Formerly the security minister, Tugendhat now shadows the same role on the other side of the House.
Although he launched his campaign with a bang by saying he would consider leaving the ECHR (European Convention on Human Rights), he is usually perceived as a moderate in the one nation wing of the party.
He argued in an article for The Telegraph that he would prepared to leave the ECHR if institutions make it harder to control the country’s borders, claiming this was a “common sense Conservative position” to take.
The former army officer suggested defence spending should be pulled up to 3% of GDP, and claimed he was running “to be the next Conservative prime minister”.
He is expected to try and appeal to Tory members more sympathetic to Reform UK.
His campaign manager, Tory MP Danny Kruger, said Jenrick has the “energy, temperament and policy agenda to take on our rivals and lead us back to power in five years.”
Advertisement
He was not included in the Savanta poll because he did not run in the last leadership election in 2022.
Who else is expected to run?
Mel Stride, shadow work and pensions secretary, admitted at the weekend he was “considering” putting himself forward – he held onto his seat in the election by just 61 votes.
Former home secretary Suella Braverman and her predecessor Priti Patel are both expected to put themselves forward in the coming days.
Kemi Badenoch, shadow housing, communities and local government secretary, may also join the race.
Shadow health secretary Victoria Atkins was expected to run, but she said she would not be in a social media post.
Rishi Sunak announced his resignation as Tory Party leader when he lost the general election
via Associated Press
Advertisement
How will the process work?
The nominations for the candidates opened on July 24.
Each candidate needs to secure backing from 10 other MPs by July 29 to make it to the next round.
But, only around 100 MPs will be able to support a chosen candidate.
That’s because MPs who are whips or who sit on the executive backbencher 1922 committee cannot support a candidate.
It means only 10 Tories – at most – will be able to move to progress past this point in the race.
If two or more candidates get through, a campaign will take place throughout the summer.
In September, MPs cast their votes on the remaining candidates.
The four with the most votes will be selected, and all offered a chance to speak at the Tory party conference, (from September 29 to October 2), and MPs will vote again.
The two with the most vote go through to the next hurdle.
The remaining pair will then have to go before the party members, who will vote on their favourite candidate in an online ballot which closes on October 31.
To vote, members must have been “active” when the whole contest opened in July, and been members for at least 90 days before the ballot closes.
The new leader and official leader of the opposition will be confirmed on November 2, and Sunak’s time leading the Conservatives will officially end.
Advertisement
They will become the sixth leader of the Tory Party since 2016.
Conservative mayor Lord Houchen called for “civility” in the upcoming Tory leadership contest, shortly after Suella Braverman’s made some eyebrow-raising comments about the party’s direction.
The former home secretary and current backbencher – who is expected to run as Conservative leader – criticised people who lean further to centre over the weekend.
Advertisement
She told The Telegraph: “If we don’t recover the votes we deliberately, and arrogantly, spurned, we will turn the Conservative Party into the 21st Century version of the 20th Century Liberal Party.
“We can do better than being a collection of fanatical, irrelevant, centrist cranks, who make it our business to insult our should-be voters for not being as smug and self-righteous as we are.”
Asked what he made of these comments on Sky News on Sunday, Houchen said the Tory party leadership should not be based on the past, but the future.
He also there should not be any “blue-on-blue attacks”.
Houchen added: “If we want to spend the next two, three, four, five months fighting with each other that goes to the cause of the election defeat just two weeks ago.
Advertisement
“And I would implore Suella, as well as every other leadership contender, to conduct this leadership contest with civility. Let’s come together and let’s offer a positive option to the country.”
He said voters “want a party that isn’t going to fight like cats in a sack”, adding that the electorate thought the Tories cared more about “in-fighting and positioning within the Conservative Party and within the government than caring about our country”.
The mayor suggested any future Tory leader needs to rule out working with Reform too, as they are a “symptom not a cause” of the problem.
But Braverman called for a deal with the populist party only a few weeks ago.
Speaking to GB Newsearlier this month, she said there was “only room for one Conservative Party on the right of British politics”.
Advertisement
The backbencher said: “There’s very little I disagree with when it comes to Nigel Farage and I met thousands of people throughout this campaign, and many, many people said to me, I’m a lifelong Tory voter, but I’m going to vote Reform.”
“They are feeling betrayed. They feel let down. They feel politically homeless because of our failures,” she added.
“So we have to address the issue of Reform. I’m not really interested in the form of what that takes, but we need to find an accommodation with Reform, with Nigel Farage, so that we can take the fight to Labour and win the next election.”
Moderate Conservatives accused the home secretary of “ill thought out policies that divide” after she confirmed the controversial move.
Advertisement
Braverman accused rough sleepers who use tents for shelter of “living on the streets as a lifestyle choice”.
She said: “Unless we step in now to stop this, British cities will go the way of places in the US like San Francisco and Los Angeles, where weak policies have led to an explosion of crime, drug taking, and squalor.”
But the Tory Reform Group – which includes senior party figures such as Damian Green, Ken Clarke, John Major and Robert Buckland – condemned the home secretary’s remarks.
In a post on X (formerly Twitter) they said: “The UK’s streets are not being taken over by tents. We are not San Francisco.
Advertisement
“If this is a sign to come of the King’s Speech, it is a missed opportunity for the government to focus on those issues that really matter to voters – not ill thought out policies which divide.”
The UK’s streets are not being taken over by tents. We are not San Francisco.
If this is a sign to come of the King’s Speech, it is a missed opportunity for the Government to focus on those issues that really matter to voters.
Braverman has also come under fire from opposition politicians, with Manchester mayor Andy Burnham describing her plans as “frankly abhorrent”.
Lib Dem Alistair Carmichael said: “It is a new low for Braverman to criminalise homeless charities for simply trying to keep vulnerable people warm and dry in winter.
“The British public raise millions of pounds for homeless people at this time of year, and the government’s response is to criminalise those charities trying to help.
Advertisement
“This policy will do nothing to stop rough sleeping and will leave vulnerable people to face the harsh weather conditions without any shelter whatsoever.”
On Sky News this morning, deputy prime minister Oliver Dowden defended Braverman by claiming her comments – in a series of four posts on X – had been taken out of context.
He said: “If you look at what she said, she did talk about addressing push factors as well.
“And if we get to a position where those factors are removed, I do think the tents and other things that that we see on our streets are not acceptable if we’ve got somewhere else for these people to go.”
Suella Braverman has been savaged after she announced plans to stop charities giving tents to rough sleepers.
The home secretary claimed that many people using tents for shelter are doing so “as a lifestyle choice”.
Advertisement
She said failing to take action would lead to “an explosion of crime, drug taking, and squalor”.
But her plans have sparked a furious political backlash, with Andy Burnham, the Labour mayor of Manchester, describing them as “frankly abhorrent”.
Under the policy, which could be included in next week’s King’s Speech setting out the government’s plans for the year ahead, charities could be fined for giving tents to rough sleepers.
Braverman said: “The British people are compassionate. We will always support those who are genuinely homeless. But we cannot allow our streets to be taken over by rows of tents occupied by people, many of them from abroad, living on the streets as a lifestyle choice.
“Unless we step in now to stop this, British cities will go the way of places in the US like San Francisco and Los Angeles, where weak policies have led to an explosion of crime, drug taking, and squalor.
Advertisement
“Nobody in Britain should be living in a tent on our streets. There are options for people who don’t want to be sleeping rough, and the Government is working with local authorities to strengthen wraparound support including treatment for those with drug and alcohol addiction.
“What I want to stop, and what the law abiding majority wants us to stop, is those who cause nuisance and distress to other people by pitching tents in public spaces, aggressively begging, stealing, taking drugs, littering, and blighting our communities.”
Alistair Carmichael, the Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesperson, said: “This is grim politics from a desperate Conservative government which knows it’s day are numbered.
“It is a new low for Braverman to criminalise homeless charities for simply trying to keep vulnerable people warm and dry in winter.
“The British public raise millions of pounds for homeless people at this time of year, and the government’s response is to criminalise those charities trying to help.
“This policy will do nothing to stop rough sleeping and will leave vulnerable people to face the harsh weather conditions without any shelter whatsoever.”
Reacting to her comments on X (formerly Twitter), Burnham said: “It is frankly abhorrent for the home secretary to be proposing banning tents for rough sleepers in the King’s Speech. I hope all decent people will unite in opposition to this obscene proposal.”
In these circumstances, it is frankly abhorrent for the Home Secretary to be proposing banning tents for rough sleepers in the King’s Speech.
I hope all decent people will unite in opposition to this obscene proposal.🙏🏻
Labour deputy leader Angela Rayner said: “Rough sleeping is not a ‘lifestyle choice’.
“A toxic mix of rising rents and failure to end no-fault evictions is hitting vulnerable people. After years of delay the Tories are failing on their promises. Now after 13 years, they’re blaming homeless people rather than themselves.”
Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar said: “How low can this morally bankrupt government go? We need to boot them out of office.”
A pro-Palestine march planned for Remembrance Day is “inappropriate”, security minister Tom Tugendhat has said.
He has written to London mayor Sadiq Khan, Westminster Council and the Metropolitan Police setting out his concerns about the event, which is due to take place on Saturday, November 11.
Advertisement
That is also Armistice Day, which marks the end of fighting in the First World War. A two-minute silence will be held at 11am.
Speaking on BBC Breakfast this morning, Tugendhat said that the planned march was “a matter of great concern to me”.
He said: “I know that many of my fellow veterans will be looking forward to that day, not a day of joy but a day of grief. It’s a day when many of us remember those who aren’t standing with us, who aren’t there to lay a wreath, who aren’t there with their friends to have a beer afterwards and talk about the old days.
“It’s a moment when we remember those we lost and I think for the whole country, the Cenotaph is sacred ground and the idea that on a day like Remembrance Day you’d have a protest going past it, I don’t think that’s acceptable.”
Advertisement
However, organisers of the march have insisted they will not go past the Cenotaph, where politicians and veterans will lay poppy wreaths for Remembrance Sunday the following day.
Tugendhat said that in his letters, he had asked Sadiq Khan, Westminster Council and the Met to “look very carefully at the powers that they have and to consider what options they have available” with regard to the November 11 march.
He added: “Personally, I don’t think this is an appropriate time for a protest.”
HuffPost UK understands that only home secretary Suella Braverman has the power to ban the march.
Asked if the protest should be banned, Tugendhat said: “I think protest is incredibly important in a free society.
“I’m just saying the Cenotaph on Remembrance Sunday is a particularly sensitive time and a sensitive place and it’s a moment when the country comes together, and so I think there are moments where and places where that’s not appropriate.”
Advertisement
Friends of Al-Aqsa (FOA) is planning to bus protestors from Leicester to London to take part in the march calling for a ceasefire in the war between Israel and Hamas.
FOA spokesman Ismail Patel said: “We definitely will not be at the Cenotaph. We understand the sensitivity of the date.”
A Met Police spokesperson said the organisers of the November 11 march were considering different locations in London.
He said: “They have indicated they are planning a march on the Saturday, but that they are considering different locations given the sensitives around this date,” the spokesperson said.”
Appearing on ITV’s this morning, the prime minister was asked by presenter Dermot O’Leary for his thoughts on Braverman’s rhetoric.
In particular, he expressed concern about her use of the word “hurricane”.
“Are you not embarrassed and ashamed when you hear words like that? Because I’m meeting you for the first time and you seem like a decent guy” O’Leary asked.
The prime minister responded: “I think that this debate gets charged a lot where people focus on one thing. So, if you just take a step back, what do I think we all agree on? We all agree that Britain is incredibly welcoming place. We haven’t failed in any way.”
O’Leary said: “Are you not mortified? That’s evil. It’s not a good word.“
Sunak replied: “They are being exploited by criminal gangs. And that’s why I’ve said it’s got to be … the British people who decide who comes to our country and not criminal gangs. They are exploiting vulnerable people.”
Advertisement
O’Leary did not let Sunak off the hook, adding, “It’s this weaponising of the word that worries me. It’s demonising the people that come here in the first place.
“It’s an issue, of course it is. It’s the incendiary use of that word, that I think most people find unhelpful and harmful because it’s not the people who are coming here’s fault.”
Failing to answer the question, Sunak replied, “I think your viewers probably feel that there is an enormous sense of frustration that there are tens of thousands of people who have come here illegally over the past few years, and that’s not right.
“And I think most people in their local community may now have a hotel that’s been put over to house illegal migrants that’s costing taxpayers.”
On Friday morning, it was reported that the daytime star was “under police guard at her home” after “sinister” messages were found on a man’s phone reportedly threatening to “seriously harm” the daytime TV presenter.
Sunak said he was “so sorry to hear about everything that is going on with Holly”.
“I wanted to send my best to her and her family and to all of you,” the PM added.
A row has erupted over the Metropolitan police after some officers turned in their firearm permits, meaning soldiers will now be drafted in to fill in the gaps.
The move – carried out by more than 100 of the 2,500 armed officers in the force – came after an officer was recently charged with the murder of Chris Kaba, an unarmed 24-year-old who died last September.
Advertisement
The debate has now escalated to include home secretary Suella Braverman, too.
Here’s what you need to know.
Why have officers handed in their firearm permits?
Later reports revealed Kaba was driving an Audi which did not belong to him, and which had been connected to a gun incident the day before.
The police officer involved was suspended from duty, charged with murder and granted bail last week. Their details have been kept anonymous.
A plea and trial preparation hearing is listed for December 1, with a possible trial date to take place next September.
Advertisement
Some officers in the Met are now worried about how the charging of their colleague might impact them which is why they’ve decided to hand in their gun permits, according to the country’s largest police force.
The Met said: “A number of officers have taken the decision to step back from armed duties while they consider their position.”
In an update on Monday, it added that some officers returned to duties in the last 24 hours.
We are aware of media reporting suggesting that all Met firearms officers have stepped back from armed duties.
This is not correct. There are armed Met officers, including counterterrorism officers, on duty across London.
For context, the London Assembly said that in April, there were 2,595 authorised firearm officers in the Met, down from 2,841 in 2018.
Home Office stats say between March 2022 and March 2023, the Met Police took part in 18,257 firearm operations – that’s a third of all firearm operations recorded in the UK.
Advertisement
However, only 10 of these incidents included an officer opening fire at a person.
What has this got to do with the Army?
The Ministry of Defence received a Military Aid to the Civil Authorities request from the Home Office to send in Army personnel to fill in the gaps.
This is not unprecedented – soldiers stepped in to help with civil missions at the height of the Covid pandemic, and during paramedics’ strikes last year.
The Home Office asked the MoD to provide “routine counter-terrorism contingency support to the Metropolitan Police, should it be needed”.
The Met explained: “To ensure that we can continue to keep the public safe and respond to any eventualities, from Saturday evening Met firearms officers will be supported by a limited number of armed officers from other UK forces.”
What has Suella Braverman said?
Home Secretary Suella Braverman has spoken up in support of the police officers.
Lucy North – PA Images via Getty Images
Advertisement
Home secretary Suella Braverman spoke out about the case on Sunday, saying there would be a review into armed policing, and that the officers have her “full backing”.
“They mustn’t fear ending up in the dock for carrying out their duties,” she claimed. “Officers risking their lives to keep us safe have my full backing and I will do everything in my power to support them. I will do everything in my power to support them.”
However, this statement, issued on X (formerly Twitter) has been controversial, because this is a comment on an active murder trial.
Doughty Street Chambers’ barrister, Adam Wagner, reposted her comment and said: “I think this series of tweets is inappropriate in the context of a live criminal case where an officer has been charged.
“It gives the clear impression, given the image in the linked article, that the Home Secretary is expressing an opinion on the Chris Kaba case.”
Advertisement
The i’s Ian Dunt told Sky News that he was “startled” by Braverman’s intervention, too.
He said journalists are told to be really careful when there’s live court proceedings, never mind cabinet ministers.
He claimed: “That’s a completely unjustifiable intervention by the home secretary and something we should be a little more alarmed about.”
#KayBurley – Suella Braverman tweeted about police officers laying down their guns
Ian Dunt(The i) – I’m startled about what Braverman wrote.. journalists are told to be really careful when there’s live court proceedings… that’s a completely unjustifiable intervention by her pic.twitter.com/83TVwjrL7e
Braverman’s review has been welcomed by Met chief commissioner Sir Mark Rowley.
He said while it was correct they were held to the “highest standards”, the current system undermines his officers, as they end up being investigated for “safely pursuing suspects” and they therefore needed more legal protection.
He said he would make “no comment” on any ongoing legal matter but said these issues “go back further” than the Kaba case.
Advertisement
He said: “Officers need sufficient legal protection to enable them to do their job and keep the public safe, and the confidence that it will be applied consistently and without fear or favour.”
However, he acknowledged that when officers act improperly, the system “needs to move swiftly” rather than “tying itself in knots pursuing good officers through multiple legal processes”.
Rowley has promised repeatedly to reform the force since getting into the role, and has vowed to robustly remove rogue officers in the Met.
It comes after years of scrutiny towards the force. A review released only in March this year called for immediate change or for the force to be broken up, claiming it was institutionally racist, misogynistic and homophobic.
Government plans to put electronic tags on immigrants to prevent them from absconding have been slammed as “just another gimmick” by Labour.
Home secretary Suella Braverman this morning refused to rule out the move, which was reported by The Times and the Daily Telegraph.
Advertisement
Asked about the plan on Sky News, Braverman said the government “needed to exercise a level of control” of migrants.
She added: “We are exploring all options to ensure that we have that level of control over people so that they can flow through our system swiftly to enable us to thereafter remove them from the United Kingdom.”
But shadow employment minister Justin Madders accused the Home Office of planning to treat asylum seekers like “criminals”.
He said: “The only people you tag are criminals, so my understanding is that people who are coming into this country seeking asylum are not criminals, they’re usually people fleeing persecution.
Advertisement
“If there’s a problem absconding this is the first I’ve heard about it and clearly the solution to that is to get on and process the asylum applications a lot quicker than is happening and this is just another gimmick that is not dealing with the root of the problem at all.”
‘The only people you tag are criminals, people that come into this country seeking asylum are not criminals.’
Justin Madders MP tells Sky News that asylum seekers are fleeing persecution and shouldn’t be treated as criminals.https://t.co/PAiZ4D1jU3
Enver Solomon, chief executive of the Refugee Council, told The Times: “It’s treating people as objects rather than vulnerable men, women and children in search of safety, who should be treated with compassion and humanity.”
The plan was even called into question by right-wing Tory MP John Redwood.
He told Times Radio: “I would need to be persuaded about the role of the electronic tag.
“I’m grateful for the clarification that it’s only going to apply to those who have been found to be illegal migrants. I think the bigger problem is to work out how many people in the system are illegal migrants and therefore need a safe place to return them to, and how many are asylum seekers.”
Suella Braverman has had a bad weekend – but the next few days are set to be even worse.
The home secretary has been keeping a low profile today after the Sunday Times revealed she had asked civil servants to help her avoid a fine for speeding last summer.
Braverman wanted to arrange a private speeding awareness course but, after that proved impossible, she accepted the fine as well as three penalty points on her licence.
Advertisement
Awkwardly, the first Rishi Sunak knew about it was when the story was about to be published.
HuffPost UK understands that although the speeding offence took place when she was still attorney general, Braverman didn’t accept the fine until after Sunak had re-appointed her to the role of home secretary in October.
The PM’s frustration was obvious this morning, when the controversy dominated his press conference marking the end of the G7 summit in Japan.
Asked by the BBC’s Chris Mason if he retained “full confidence” in his cabinet colleague, a grim-faced Sunak replied: ”Well Chris I don’t know the full details about what has happened, nor have I spoken to the home secretary. I think you can see first hand what I’ve been doing over the last day or so.
“But I understand that she’s expressed regret for speeding, accepted the penalty and paid the fine.”
When he returns from the G7 on Monday, the PM will hold talks with Sir Laurie Magnus, his independent ethics adviser, about the Braverman controversy.
Advertisement
Both Labour and the Lib Dems say Sunak must order Sir Laurie to conduct a full inquiry to uncover all the facts.
More immediately, Braverman will have to face the music in the House of Commons at Home Office questions on Monday afternoon.
But that is not the only ordeal the embattled home secretary faces in the coming days.
On Thursday, official figures will confirm that net migration is approaching one million – well above the “tens of thousands” Braverman has said she wants to get it down to.
She – and Sunak – will come under severe pressure from Tory MPs to set out exactly how they plan to reverse the current immigration trend.
Despite the latest controversy surrounding Braverman – she had to quit as home secretary under Liz Truss after breaking security rules, only to be given her job back by Sunak just days later – her position remains safe for now.
Advertisement
One senior Tory source said: “If she was sacked, she would just team up with the other disaffected people and cause the prime minister more trouble. Sometimes it’s best to keep them inside the tent.”
Nevertheless, the week ahead will be the toughest of Braverman’s career. How she handles it will tell us a lot about what kind of future she has in British politics.
