The Prime Minister’s decision on Braverman is sensible

After all that, the Prime Minister ruled that Suella Braverman did not breach the ministerial code over her handling of a speeding fine. Following the exit of Dominic Raab, and the Home Secretary’s previous resignation over sending an official document from her personal email, the Government’s critics had scented blood. Could another minister be forced out for reasons altogether bemusing to the public?

This time, Rishi Sunak concluded: no. He said that he had consulted with his independent adviser on ethics, Sir Laurie Magnus, and judged that no further investigation was necessary. “A better course of action could have been taken to avoid giving rise to the perception of impropriety,” he wrote in a letter to Mrs Braverman, but “you have provided a thorough account, apologised and expressed regret”. He may hope that this will assuage concerns that Tory Right-wingers are being picked off in a Whitehall witch hunt, but why did it take so long?

The brouhaha raises one matter of process and one of substance. It is correct that the Prime Minister is the arbiter of whether a minister should be required to resign. Proposals to elevate his ethics adviser to a more powerful role would be undemocratic. It is also right that Mrs Braverman will now be left to get on with her job. The scale of the task facing her will become apparent today, with the release of the latest net migration figures.

They will expose the chasm between the Government’s tough rhetoric and the reality of an immigration system running out of control. That, in the end, will be how most voters will judge her performance as Home Secretary. Will she be able, or allowed, to do anything about it?