AMBER RUDD’S now tenuous position as Home Secretary would be slightly more secure if she’d made a more authoritative response to the Windrush scandal which shows no sign of abating after a fortnight of damaging disclosures.
However the fact that Ms Rudd’s latest statement to Parliament posed even more questions about her management, and allayed very few fears of those legal migrants who are being threatened with deportation, inspires little confidence.
And the longer that Ms Rudd struggles to regain control of the agenda, the greater the belief that she’s sparing her predecessor – one Theresa May – from further embarrassment.
Though Shadow Home Secretary Diane Abbott’s renewed call for Ms Rudd to resign was a cynical cheap shot from a Labour party that did not get to grips with all aspects of immigration policy when last in office, it falls to the Home Secretary to deal with the present shambles.
Why were local officials implementing removal targets? Who ordered this? Why did Ms Rudd not know about their existence? ‘Wait and see’ is not an adequate response.
It does not end here. What action did the Home Office take when Commonwealth leaders warned the Foreign Office in 2016 of their concerns? Ms Rudd’s ‘wait and see’ response to West Yorkshire MP Yvette Cooper, head of the Home Affairs Select Committee, should not suffice.
And, most pertinently of all, when does Ms Rudd intend to clarify the residency status of all Windrush generation migrants caught up in the controversy? They, too, deserve better than ‘wait and see’.