Why Did Louise Haigh really resign as Transport Minister ?
The rather unexpected announcement on 29th November that Louise Haigh had resigned as Transport minister inevitably precipitated much speculation about ‘goings on in high places’. The party line explanation she offered was the bog-standard ‘I don’t want to be a distraction’ recipe, accompanied by the usual weasel words of support from the PM for the decision and good wishes for the future….which, if course, tells us precisely nothing.
To establish what really went on, we need to look at
the background. Several pertinent facts emerge:
1) * Starmer
knew about Haigh’s 2013 conviction for ‘making a false report to the police’ about her mugging when he appointed her to the ministerial posts she has occupied.
This rules out concealment on her part as a direct cause for her dismissal.
2) * Since
the election in July, Haigh has been in the spotlight several times as ‘not
seeing eye to eye’ with the PM, most notably over the P&O ferries debacle,
which earned her an stern reprimand from the PM. Some were quite surprised at the time
that she survived as a minister at all.
3) * Haigh
was the only remaining Cabinet member regarded as ‘soft left’ and who supported
Corbyn for the leadership.
4) * Starmer
has been trying to purge the parliamentary party and the rank and file of the
hard left for the last 5 years, and will be acutely conscious that he has so
far failed to do this. It's also of note that, whilst Haigh’s presence in the cabinet was always at his
discretion, Angela Rayner, his deputy’s, isn’t as she holds a post elected by
the party over which he has no veto. She would be the most likely candidate to replace Starmer after a Momentum 'coup'.
My guess is that Starmer will have realised his mistake in appointing Haigh some time ago, and will have sought guidance from his advisors in true Shakespearean style as to "..who will rid me of this troublesome priest ?..".
He has no doubt been waiting for an opportunity to unseat Haigh as a ‘dissenter’ without the need to sack her openly, and may actually have deliberately leaked the info. regarding her conviction to the media. The media attention this produced gave him the cue to offer her the alternatives of resignation with 'honour’....or an ignominious sacking and the inevitable end of her political career.
In another twist to the tale, Haigh must naively have assumed that Starmer had her best interests at heart, and relied on him to ensure that the government's propriety and ethics team were notified of her conviction when she was appointed as a cabinet minister, as would normally be required. The fact that Starmer did not do this at the time is highly significant, and actually does leaves him open personally to the accusation of lack of probity. So far this does not seem to have gone anywhere, but may yet come back to haunt him. As a former human rights lawyer and Director of |Public Prosecutions, he must have been well aware of this aspect of parliamentary protocol.
If things did play out in this way, it would indicate a positively Machiavellian ‘stitch-up’ on his part, and will certainly have given some food for thought for the rest of his team….
However it played out in the event, Haigh’s departure is unfortunate, since she had already made good progress with rail reform, and showed promise as a champion of bus service improvement. Her departure leaves pensioners concerned once again about their bus passes – Haigh was quite forthright during media interviews in promising not to abolish the English concession ‘while I’m in charge of Transport’, and this may actually have been another ‘nail in her coffin’.
Her replacement, Heidi
Alexander, formerly looking after Justice, and back in parliament this year
after a stint managing London Transport under Sadiq Khan, may well be less favourable
towards continuing bus concessions, although it must be said that Londoners do currently
get the best deal of all from the English Concession…..
What we can plainly see from this rather unsavoury
tale is that the current leadership, while just as error-prone as the Tories
were, has an altogether more authoritarian and bullying character. Starmer is quite merciless when it comes to any form of dissent within his cabinet, and will
ruthlessly eliminate anyone who doesn’t mirror his views.
Sounds familiar, perhaps ?….
One aspect of authoritarian governments dependent on the power of one individual that can hasten their demise is their lack of flexibility and their consequent inability to adapt. I suspect this one may not survive all that long. Only time, of course, will tell....
First published 30.11.24
Revised 3.12.24
Comments
Post a Comment