Almost every Westminster day, another expendable minister is lifted from the lobster tank and told to answer a Commons urgent question on the China ‘spies’ affair.
The latest to suffer this fate – and told to cover the backsides of Messrs Powell, Starmer and Hermer – was Solicitor General Ellie Reeves.
Poor soul, she was terrible.
Ms Reeves came to the chamber before elevenses. It was soon apparent that had she been handed a mid-morning KitKat she would have snapped the damn thing into numerous fragments.
She was clearly in no mood for this China fandango. Conservative MPs pestered her with questions she would/could not answer.
They suspected that Lord Hermer, Attorney General, was involved in the abandoned prosecution of two alleged Chinese spies.
He, being a member of the Lords, cannot be dragged to the Commons despatch box. His hapless colleague Reeves (sister of Rachel – their voices are similar) had to reply for him.
These Tories‘ questions buzzed around her fair head. If you remember how Curtiss F8C
Helldivers tormented King Kong when he was clinging to the Empire State Building, you will have the idea.
Ellie Reeves was clearly in no mood for this China fandango, writes Quentin Letts
Who knew what, when? Why was the Starmer Government so happy to see Beijing’s ‘spies’ go unprosecuted? Was Lord Hermer, Sir Keir’s oldest lawyer pal, up to his oxters in this apparent mire?
Ms Reeves glowered. She scowled. Her brow corrugated with crossness. She folded her arms and leaned on the despatch box in a distinctly cheesed-off pose.
Basically, she refused to comment. Out came the lower lip. A pout. A mulish cast of eye. Nope. Not gonna say.
Lawyers are normally better at evasion. Ms Reeves just kept repeating a line that Lord Hermer was going to appear before a committee of MPs next week, and he would answer for himself there.
Robert Jenrick gave her a few jabs. Tom Tugendhat pricked her. From Sir Iain Duncan Smith came more stings and tickles.
Nick Timothy snorted derision at what he felt was the pointlessness of these non-answers. Ms Reeves stared blackly into the middle-distance.
Just one Labour MP, that heroic crawler John Slinger (Rugby), tried to help her. Laughter. Every Parliament has a few obliging suction devices.
The benches surrounding him were empty. Labour MPs hate this scandal. They can smell the pong.
More than that, they can see innocent ministers being forced to surrender hard-won reputations in order to save the Prime Minister’s privileged chums. It is not a pretty sight. Only sketchwriters enjoy such a spectacle.
At Cabinet Office questions earlier Dan Jarvis, security minister, was a fraction of his former self.
Ex-soldier Jarvis used to be widely liked. He always seemed honest, non-partisan, uncomplicated. The China case has changed that. Decent Dan has retreated into formulaic evasions. He has changed physically, lost weight, gone greyer, surlier.
When asked about it by the Tories’ Alex Burghart, Mr Jarvis tried to complain that it was out of order. Speaker Hoyle swiftly slapped him down. The Speaker is angry about this scandal. Mr Jarvis’s weary eyes shot him a glance.
At what point will the old Jarvis reassert himself and accept that no Hermer or Powell is worth the loss of one’s integrity?
Another minister ruptured by the affair is Chris Ward, only recently appointed to the Cabinet Office. An eager and bright lad. Yet his despatch box debut, owing to the China crisis, was farcical. A golden duck! Mr Ward was not on parade yesterday. Will we ever see him again?
Ms Reeves continued to obfuscate but her mainframe was starting to fuse. She increasingly said ‘er’.
Although a qualified lawyer, she talked of ‘core tenants’ rather than ‘core tenets’. She used ‘regretful’ where she meant ‘regrettable’. ‘Scrutiny’ came out as ‘scootiny’.
She dismissed concerns about this case as ‘baseless smears’ and she snarled at the Tories – it was all their fault! She tilted her head to indicate her contempt for these blasted questions.
Resentment festers. Sir Keir’s stock falls.
