Photo credit: www.theguardian.com
Warning signs regarding Tulip Siddiq’s political trajectory have existed for some time. Concerns intensified within the Labour party when a photograph surfaced in 2015 showing Siddiq alongside Vladimir Putin and her aunt, the former leader of Bangladesh, during a significant arms deal and nuclear project signing in the Kremlin two years prior.
At that point, Siddiq was vying for a parliamentary seat in the competitive constituency of Hampstead and Kilburn. She downplayed the criticisms related to her association with the high-profile event, stating, “I wasn’t part of my aunt’s delegation. I went because I don’t get to see her much.” She recalled Putin expressing a desire for a photo, adding, “In retrospect, I should have thought about how it looked. I think Putin would wonder: ‘Who is this random girl I am meant to be making arms deals with?’”
Recent revelations about her connections to the previous Bangladesh government have left some officials in Downing Street regretting her appointment as the government’s anti-corruption minister. A Labour MP remarked, “It was an own goal. Everybody knew she was a member of Bangladesh’s political dynasty with ties to great power and wealth. Who thought it was prudent to highlight that by giving her that role?”
Sir Laurie Magnus, the independent adviser on ministerial standards, has determined that Siddiq has not breached the ministerial code. He indicated that there was “no suggestion” of any irregular financial dealings or assets sourced from anything other than legitimate means.
Nevertheless, Magnus’ review of allegations concerning Siddiq’s residence in multiple properties linked to the former Bangladeshi government is inconclusive and emphasizes the murkiness surrounding her connections to the administration led by her aunt, Sheikh Hasina. Although Magnus acknowledged that Siddiq provided “considerable background information” suggesting her affairs were appropriate, he found it “regrettable” that she could not supply definitive documentation due to the time elapsed.
These findings were anticipated by officials in Downing Street, revealing no new facts. One senior government figure noted, “It just doesn’t pass the smell test. Even if she hasn’t technically done anything wrong, she must go.”
Significant concerns arose over Siddiq’s assertion that she was unaware of her King’s Cross flat’s origins, which she initially believed was a gift from her parents rather than a benefactor with ties to the ousted regime, despite her signing a Land Registry transfer form related to the property.
A government source expressed skepticism: “Who is given a flat but doesn’t know where it comes from? It just stretches credulity. And it’s so far removed from most people’s lives to even be in that position.”
Keir Starmer, the Labour leader and Siddiq’s parliamentary neighbor, has demonstrated decisiveness in potential political scandals, as seen in the swift dismissal of transport secretary Louise Haigh following a fraud conviction concerning a missing work phone.
This leads to questions about Starmer’s responsiveness regarding Siddiq’s situation, especially once it became clear that her role as anti-corruption minister was compromised. Downing Street sources suggested Starmer opted for a procedural approach, despite the anticipated conclusion of Magnus’s inquiry.
“We always knew how this was going to end but Keir felt it was right to go through the official process,” one insider remarked. While Siddiq and the Prime Minister are not particularly close, they maintain a positive relationship.
Credit was given to Siddiq for reporting herself to the standards adviser, although it is believed that considerable pressure was involved in that decision as well as her subsequent resignation.
In the aftermath of her resignation, Starmer indicated that “the door remains open” for Siddiq’s return to government, appointing Emma Reynolds, a former lobbyist, as her successor in the City minister role. This situation underscores the ongoing challenge for the government to regain public confidence in British politics.
Source
www.theguardian.com