Culture Secretary Maria Miller leaves Number 10 Downing Street on December 3, 2012. Photograph: Getty Images.
Show Hide image

It just gets worse for Maria Miller - how long can she survive?

Under fire from her colleagues and the voters, the Culture Secretary is surely now considering whether all sides would be best served by her falling on her sword. 

Five days after Maria Miller's non-apology, her position looks ever more vulnerable. Esther McVey, one of those tipped to replace her as culture secretary, last night became the first minister to criticise her actions, telling ITV's The Agenda: "I can honestly say it wouldn’t be how I would have made an apology. But different people have different styles and do things in different ways."

Meanwhile, Graham Brady, the head of the backbench 1922 committeee, has warned David Cameron that MPs from across the party want Miller to be sacked (with one describing the story as "absolutely toxic"), a change.org petition calling for her to "either pay back £45,000 in fraudulent expense claims or resign" has received more than 130,000 signatures, and, to top it all, David Laws has popped up on the Today programme to helpfully offer his "support". By contrast, while expressing his "natural sympathy", Boris Johnson declined to say she should remain in her post: "My natural sympathy goes out to people in a hounded situation - how about that?" 

While refusing to criticise Miller directly, cabinet ministers are also making it clear that whether she stays or goes is a decision for Cameron alone. Dominic Grieve said: "She’s a valued colleague, as far as I’m concerned, but she has got to answer to her constituents and also answer for her responsibilities to the Prime Minister." And Iain Duncan Smith commented: "No one is above the law, that is the only point I would make. There have been big sanctions and a number of people who have misrepresented themselves in the parliamentary system have now gone to prison...I’m not going to judge this particular case because this is a complex issue."

The pressure on Cameron to dismiss Miller, and stem the bleeding, has certainly intensified over the last 24 hours. But it remains far from certain that the PM will be moved to act. Cameron is famously stubborn in his defence of under-fire colleagues (recall how long he stood by Andy Coulson) and rarely misses an opportunity not to wield the knife (as the continued cabinet presence of Andrew Lansley, Jeremy Hunt and Iain Duncan Smith demonstrates). That the blitzkrieg against Miller is partly (or even largely) due to her role in promoting press regulation and equal marriage is only likely toincrease his determination to protect her. 

And while the complaints of the 1922 committee (which the PM will address tomorrow) cannot be dismissed out of hand, Cameron's position, owing to the economic recovery and the narrowing of Labour's poll lead, is stronger than it has been for years. Reflecting this changed reality, Tory rebel Andrew Bridgen yesterday wrote to Brady withdrawing his letter of no confidence in the PM. 

But the longer the row persists, the harder it will be for Miller to reasonably remain in her post. The Culture Secretary has been pulling out of scheduled appearances and interviews and reportedly made the "quickest ever" entrance into Downing Street this morning. In these circumstances, Miller is surely now considering whether all sides would be best served by her falling on her sword. 

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.

European People's Party via Creative Commons
Show Hide image

Ansbach puts Europe's bravest politician under pressure

Angela Merkel must respond to a series of tragedies and criticisms of her refugee policy. 

Angela Merkel, the Chancellor of Germany, is supposed to be on holiday. Two separate attacks have put an end to that. The first, a mass shooting in Munich, was at first widely believed to be a terrorist attack, but later turned out to be the actions of a loner obsessed with US high school shootings. The second, where a man blew himself up in the town of Ansbach, caused less physical damage - three were seriously injured, but none killed. Nevertheless, this event may prove to affect even more people's lives. Because that man had come to Germany claiming to be a Syrian refugee. 

The attack came hours after a Syrian refugee murdered a pregnant Polish woman, a co-woker in a snack bar, in Reutlingen. All eyes will now be on Merkel who, more than any other European politician, is held responsible for Syrian refugees in Europe.

In 2015, when other European states were erecting barriers to keep out the million migrants and refugees marching north, Merkel kept Germany's borders open. The country has resettled 41,899 Syrians since 2013, according to the UNHCR, of which 20,067 came on humanitarian grounds and 21,832 through private sponsorship. That is twice as much as the UK has pledged to resettle by 2020. The actual number of Syrians in Germany is far higher - 90 per cent of the 102,400 Syrians applying for EU asylum in the first quarter of 2016 were registered there. 

Merkel is the bravest of Europe's politicians. Contrary to some assertions on the right, she did not invent the refugee crisis. Five years of brutal war in Syria did that. Merkel was simply the first of the continent's most prominent leaders to stop ignoring it. If Germany had not absorbed so many refugees, they would still be in central Europe and the Balkans, and we would be seeing even more pictures of starved children in informal camps than we do today. 

Equally, the problems facing Merkel now are not hers alone. These are the problems facing all of Europe's major states, whether or not they recognise them. 

Take the failed Syrian asylum seeker of Ansbach (his application was rejected but he could not be deported back to a warzone). In Germany, his application could at least be considered, and rejected. Europe as a whole has not invested in the processing centres required to determine who is a Syrian civilian, who might be a Syrian combatant and who is simply taking advantage of the black market in Syrian passports to masquerade as a refugee. 

Secondly, there is the subject of trauma. The Munich shooter appears to have had no links to Islamic State or Syria, but his act underlines the fact you do not need a grand political narrative to inflict hurt on others. Syrians who have experienced unspeakable violence either in their homeland or en route to Europe are left psychologically damaged. That is not to suggest they will turn to violence. But it is still safer to offer such people therapy than leave them to drift around Europe, unmonitored and unsupported, as other countries seem willing to do. 

Third, there is the question of lawlessness. Syrians have been blamed for everything from the Cologne attacks in January to creeping Islamist radicalisation. But apart from the fact that these reports can turn out to be overblown (two of the 58 men arrested over Cologne were Syrians), it is unclear what the alternative would be. Policies that force Syrians underground have already greatly empowered Europe's network of human traffickers and thugs.

So far, Merkel seems to be standing her ground. Her home affairs spokesman, Stephan Mayer, told the BBC that Germany had room to improve on its asylum policy, but stressed each attack was different. 

He said: "Horrible things take place in Syria. And it is the biggest humanitarian catastrophe, so it is completely wrong to blame Angela Merkel, or her refugee policies, for these incidents." Many will do, all the same.