Forceful expression or bullying? Whitehall’s case for and against

THE report into allegations of bullying by Priti Patel will not be published but is said by Whitehall sources to contain claims by at least a dozen civil servants including senior mandarins in the three departments where the Home Secretary was a minister.

Sir Alex Allan, the Government’s independent adviser on standards, characterised her behaviour as “forceful expression”, including some cases of shouting and swearing that left some civil servants upset.

However, Sir Alex also found she had become “justifiably frustrated” in many instances by obstructive mandarins’ “lack of responsiveness and support” and who failed to give her any feedback on the impact of her behaviour.

While he f ound her behaviour amounted to bullying, in breach of the ministerial code – a judgment rejected by Boris Johnson, he also said that the Civil Service itself “needs to reflect on its role during this period”.

The allegations against Ms Patel:

Bullying

The controversy came to a head when Sir Philip Rutnam, the Home Office permanent secretary, resigned in February over what he claimed was a “vicious and orchestrated campaign”.

He claimed she bullied and belittled officials in meetings, made unreasonable demands and created a climate of fear. In one case, it was claimed a senior Home Office official collapsed after a fractious meeting with Ms Patel when she demanded to know why the department had failed to reverse a High Court ruling barring the deportation of 25 foreign criminals to Jamaica.

The official fell ill l ater during another meeting and was taken to hospital, where he was found to have a sodium deficiency.

In another meeting, she was alleged to have questioned why police could not use force to stop Extinction Rebellion shutting down central London during protests. “She’s belittled [Sir Philip] and caused consternation, and she frequently encourages behaviour outside the rule of law.”

Battles with officials

A former official claimed Ms Patel had lobbied No 10 in an attempt to get Sir Philip removed from the department, without success. A second senior civil servant in charge of the department’s oversight of police was forced out of the Home Office after falling foul of Ms Patel, while a senior member of her private office is said to have left after clashes with her.

Relations between Sir Philip and Ms Patel reportedly reached a low with neither of them meeting for more than a week after the tensions became public.

Each blamed the other, with allies of Sir Philip claiming he had been “cut out”, while Ms Patel’s officials said he had spurned invitations to meetings.

Past allegation

The Home Office controversy led to further allegations including claims of bullying at International Development,

where she was secretary of state, and at the Department of Work and Pensions, where it was claimed a civil servant was awarded a £25,000 payout following allegations of bullying. The member of staff alleged she was told the decision to dismiss her was not made on performance grounds but because Ms Patel did not “like [her] face”, according to a line manager and a colleague.

The case for Ms Patel:

Civil service obstruction

Allies of Ms Patel claimed Sir Philip Rutnam had “obstructed” and “undermined” her by attempting to block announcements, thwart staff moves and undermine her in Cabinet.

Sources confirmed that Ms Patel had tried to remove Sir Philip, who had been permanent secretary for three years, because of a “genuine disagreement.”

“They are just not the right fit,” said a source. “We want to deliver on the manifesto and we need people in the right places to make sure all of it happens.”

Friends said she had been the victim of “politi cally- motivated” l eaks intended to embarrass her from a “high level” within the department, including the leaking of her private letters to the Prime Minister.

They claimed Sir Philip tried to block an announcement that more police would be allowed to carry Tasers. Two months later, in November 2019, the

sources said Patel had been refused a briefing to present at a meeting of the Cabinet. Sir Philip then gave the document to Brandon Lewis, who was the security minister at the time.

“You would sit in meetings with Rutnam, and Priti would ask: ‘ Where are you with this issue,’ and he would say: ‘I will have to get back to you on that’,” said sources.

Sir Philip was allegedly so obstructive he was nicknamed “Dr No” and was known for quashing ideas by claiming there was a 70 per cent chance of the Home Office losing a legal challenge.

Friction over staff changes

Ms Patel wanted different officials in two key roles “which took a lot longer than it should have done”, while a valued member of her team she backed in her bid for promotion was denied it and ended up leaving, according to sources.

Counter-claims

On the case of the collapsed official, Ms Patel’s camp said: “It was not a dressing down meeting, it was everyone frustrated about what do we need to do about this to make sure it doesn’t happen in the future.”

On the DWP, Ms Patel’s camp said the claimant had only worked for her for two weeks, was in the process of leaving and had made the allegations of bullying against the department rather than her.