Patel’s future in doubt as Tories turn on her in Parliamentary debate

International Development Secretary Priti Patel is in deep, deep trouble.

As This Writer types, MPs are debating her “holiday” in Israel during August, in which she held meetings with politicians and organisations from that country including the Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu.

Ms Patel is not present – she is on a plane to Africa, on what DfID minister Alistair Burt is describing as official business. That must be a pleasant change of pace for her!

Mr Burt has admitted that Ms Patel did not inform anybody in the government about the nature of her visit and the meetings that were planned – the Foreign Office found out on August 24, several days after she had travelled there.

We know that she lied about this to The Guardian on her return, and released a statement yesterday that, basically, tied herself in knots.

There were clear breaches of the Ministerial Code, as This Site has detailed here and here.

And she came back seeking aid money for the Israeli army. The claim was that it would be used to look after Syrian refugees but, nevertheless, that does not seem in line with the intentions informing her department’s work.

No fewer than four Conservative MPs have criticised Ms Patel’s conduct in this matter. The Guardian reports:

Crispin Blunt, a former chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee, said it was important for cabinet ministers to understand all both sides of the Israel/Palestine conflict. Implying that Patel did not fully understand the Palestinian perspective, he told Burt, an experienced minister for the Middle East:

He is probably the most equipped of her ministers to take her very gently in hand, and I hope he does.

Sir Hugo Swire said the public wanted “transparency and accountability”. He also said that organisations that lobby ministers should open their books.

Bob Blackman said that there was a problem having two departments dealing with foreign affairs, the Foreign Office and the department for international development. He said it was important to clarify the responsibility of ministers when they went abroad.

Sir Desmond Swayne said that when he met the deputy Israeli prime minister, the deputy PM stormed out. Swayne made a joke about it, but he implied that he might have been rather more robust with the Israelis than Patel.

This Writer found Sir Desmond’s comment in particularly bad taste. He suggested that Ms Patel received a better reception because she is a woman – which should have nothing to do with this debate at all. But I would suggest this is merely another demonstration of the Tory lack of consideration about their words that characterises, among other things, the career of Boris Johnson.

And let’s not forget that this is not the first time Ms Patel has fallen foul of the Ministerial Code. During the EU referendum campaign she made “misleading and inaccurate” claims about Turkey’s bid to join the European Union. It seems she said Turkish membership of the EU was being “accelerated with David Cameron’s support”, at a time when Mr Cameron was the prime minister.

Despite these breaches of the Code, Ms Patel has (so far) got away with a mere verbal reprimand from Theresa May.

The Prime Minister, it seems, is too weak to take the only logical step – sacking Ms Patel – and has chosen instead to blame the Ministerial Code.

So Mrs May intends to re-write it.

She says this will tighten up its rules, but I think we can all tell that Mrs May – as corrupt as they come – will instead take the opportunity to do the exact opposite, writing in escape clauses so her ministers can continue to do whatever they like without fear of reprisals.

Theresa May really is that weak.

And that is why it is up to her MPs to do the right thing. Several of them have done so already. Let us hope they, and others, will pile on the pressure to remove Ms Patel from the government before her incessant pursuit of her own agenda causes worse problems.

ADDITIONAL: In the debate, Mr Burt said Theresa May considers the matter to be closed. It seems members of the public disagree:

Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.

The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:


4 thoughts on “Patel’s future in doubt as Tories turn on her in Parliamentary debate

  1. Dez

    Anyone who is in attendance with a lobbyist and not been transparent about their unannounced visit is not a person I would like running this giant UK Gov bunce fund which already does not sit well with a good number of taxpayers of the UK because the apparent lack of management and integrity control. Hopefully any meaningful “gestures and expenses” offerred by the lobbyist or his company will be fully disclosed and transparent…unfortunately from the current display of lack of transparency I am not holding any long breaths.

  2. Brian

    “And she came back seeking aid money for the Israeli army”. Funny that, cos she may also have questions to answer of ‘expense claims’ for this trip.

Comments are closed.