THE Home Office spent more than £370,000 to settle a top civil servant’s tribunal claim after he quit amid allegations of Priti Patel’s bullying, accounts confirm.
Former permanent secretary Sir Philip Rutnam accepted the six-figure sum earlier this year after launching legal action against the Home Secretary.
He dramatically resigned in February last year, accusing Patel of a “vicious and orchestrated” briefing campaign against him, claiming constructive dismissal and accusing her of bullying subordinates.
An employment tribunal was due to hear his case in September.
READ MORE: UK Government settles with Home Office boss who accused Priti Patel of bullying
The Home Office’s annual report and accounts for 2020-21 confirm he received a payout of £340,000 plus legal costs – taking the spend to at least £370,000 plus VAT of an anticipated £6000.
Although the figures were previously reported, neither Rutnam’s representatives nor the department would publicly disclose the amount at the time.
The document, published on Thursday, said: “Sir Philip Rutnam resigned from his post as Permanent Secretary of the Home Office on 29 February 2020 and subsequently began legal proceedings against the department.
“On 4 March 2021, the Home Office and Sir Philip signed an agreement to settle these proceedings. As part of this settlement, the Home Office made a special payment of £340,000. A contribution to his legal costs was also made of £30,000 plus VAT.”
Reports emerged on February 20, 2020 that Patel had sought to remove Rutnam after a series of rows and that he had raised concerns about her with the Cabinet Office.
The Times newspaper claimed at the time that multiple sources inside the Home Office accused Patel of “bullying” and “belittling” officials. The Home Office said at the time no formal complaints had been made against her.
By February 29, Rutnam had left his post after a series of damning reports in the press, and launched a blistering attack on Patel and announced he would be pursuing a claim for “constructive, unfair dismissal” in the courts.
In March, an inquiry was launched into the bullying claims but the full contents of the report would not be revealed until November.
READ MORE: Priti Patel's ex-top official contradicts her defence to bullying inquiry
The BBC initially said a draft report concluded in the summer that Patel had broken the rules on the minister’s behaviour.
On November 20, Sir Alex Allan, Boris Johnson’s adviser on ministerial standards, resigned after the Prime Minister contradicted his advice by judging Patel did not breach the rules despite being found to have bullied staff.
Allan said the Home Secretary had not always treated civil servants with “consideration and respect” and he had concluded that her approach on occasions “amounted to behaviour that can be described as bullying in terms of the impact felt by individuals”.
After Allan’s resignation, Patel said she was “sorry that my behaviour in the past has upset people”.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel