Amber Rudd will remain loyal to PM, but foreign secretary will have no issue with speaking out

As the cabinet crowded round the table at No 10, the fallout from the Windrush scandal was at the top of the agenda. Over the previous few days, they had stuck resolutely to the script, acknowledging their “shame” and expressing a “determination” to put things right.

But behind closed doors, the cabinet is far from united on how to do that. Windrush has exposed a faultline between Theresa May and the ministers, including Amber Rudd, who support a softer approach to immigration. The home secretary has already delayed her immigration bill until next year and declined to confirm that she is aiming to hit the Conservatives’ net migration target.

Boris Johnson is among those urging a more liberal approach. While the government in effect announced an amnesty for Windrush immigrants earlier this week, he argued that they should go further, with a broader amnesty for people from Commonwealth nations and beyond.

PMQs: Corbyn calls for Amber Rudd to resign over Windrush scandal - Politics live Read more

It is not the first time the foreign secretary has suggested the idea. He first floated an amnesty 10 years ago, during his London mayoral campaign. Some observed that backing a policy that had zero prospect of happening was a perfect bit of virtue signalling for a man trying to win over a multicultural and tolerant city, while getting tied up in knots over previous remarks about “piccaninnies”.

A few months later, he launched a review into the feasibility of granting an amnesty to about 400,000 people living illegally in London. His willingness to depart from Tory policy, the fact that the then Labour government regarded the issue as politically toxic and his lack of legal powers over immigration policy were not about to stand in his way.

In the aftermath of the Brexit vote, conscious of the disdain with which he was viewed by many liberal remainers, he suggested at a No 10 meeting that migrants in the country illegally should be allowed to stay after Brexit. Theresa May had already ruled out the policy during her time at the Home Office, arguing that it would send out “the wrong message”.

Boris Johnson doesn’t care about Windrush – only about himself | Jonathan Freedland Read more

While political opportunism is never far from Johnson’s mind, and he has an overpowering desire for approval and the limelight, he also has other motivations. He once described himself as a “one-man melting pot” with Muslim, Jewish and Christian forbears, whose wife is half-Indian. It is no surprise that he thinks an amnesty would be the “humane” thing to do. Johnson wears his jumbled-up heritage with great pride.

The prime minister is said to have reacted icily to the foreign secretary’s latest airing of his amnesty proposal. No 10 has been at great pains to stress that while May wants to fulfil her obligations to the Windrush generation, she will continue to crack down on illegal immigration. So why now?

As ever, Johnson is better on the bigger picture than the detail. He is fully aware of how toxic the scandal is to the Conservative brand. And he will be frustrated that some of his colleagues, including the prime minister, do not seem to get it. The senior Conservative strategist Lord Cooper sounded the alarm on Tuesday over the party’s declining popularity with non-white voters.

In the foreign secretary’s mind, it would be far simpler to rip up a few bits of paper and amend some dusty files to regularise the migrants’ status. He is also convinced by the economic case that these are people who have been contributing to the country’s wealth for decades, and their families will continue to do so.

Johnson is probably the most pro-immigration minister in cabinet, and certainly the only one likely to stick his neck out. The continuing row over the inclusion of student numbers in net migration targets laid bare the divisions. He is up against hardliners including Chris Grayling and loyalists such as Gavin Williamson and Karen Bradley.

Where does Rudd stand? She faces perhaps her toughest test on Wednesday when she appears in front of the home affairs select committee, where she will constantly be asked to pin the blame on May. If previous assured performances are anything to go by, she will withstand the pressure.

The beleaguered home secretary’s allies are rallying round and colleagues believe her job is safe unless further scandals emerge. One Tory MP said: “We may not agree on everything, but she’s one of our biggest beasts and we need her.” Desperate to shift the blame for the “hostile environment” policy, they point the finger of blame at Home Office culture and the previous Labour government.

Rudd is instinctively more pro-immigration than the prime minister, but she will be loyal to the end. May relies on the home secretary to protect her legacy, and Rudd knows it is in her best interests to do so.

Johnson, however, has no such qualms. As he memorably declared after he was fired by the then Conservative leader Michael Howard almost 15 years ago: “My friends, as I have discovered myself, there are no disasters, only opportunities.”