Another troubled day for Chris Grayling, the transport secretary, began with a less-than-flattering profile in The New York Times and ended with MPs demanding to know where he was. He must be glad it’s Thursday.
In the House of Commons, the Labour Party directed an urgent question at the hapless secretary of state over the government’s £33 million payment to Eurotunnel to settle legal action over the award of Brexit contracts to ferry firms.
But Grayling was a no-show. Matt Hancock, the health secretary, appeared in his stead.
“Once again the transport secretary is not in his place to answer a question directed at him,” said Grayling’s opposite number, the shadow transport secretary, Andy McDonald.
“His disregard for taxpayers in this House is clear,” he continued, adding that Grayling was an “international embarrassment” who should be sacked without delay.
During the urgent question session, Labour backbacker Jo Stevens appeared to praise Hancock for “really taking one for the team”, adding: “Incidentally, where is the transport secretary?”
Hancock was appearing, he explained, because the much-criticised £14 million contract handed to Seaborne Freight was designed to ensure emergency medical supplies reached the UK “unhindered” in the event of a no-deal Brexit. The trouble with the Seaborne deal, however, was that the company had no ships and no port contract.
“The transport secretary is working hard in making sure we can improve the transport system,” Hancock told MPs by way of explanation of his Cabinet colleague’s absence.
“He said that with a straight face,” said Nic Dakin, another Labour MP. “Almost.”
When facing a point of order over why Grayling did not face his critics, Commons Speaker John Bercow said it was “not altogether uncommon” for another government department to respond to an urgent question but was “relatively unusual for the secretary of state in the department questioned not to appear”.
Hancock reiterated the maximum cost of the legal settlement with Eurotunnel is £33 million, adding: “The purpose of the decision was to ensure the unhindered flow of medicines. The purpose of this is to make sure that whatever happens in Brexit people can be safe.”
Earlier in the day, Grayling was pilloried in The New York Times.
“They call him ‘Failing Grayling’,” the newspaper said on Twitter, sharing the article.
“He has bumbled his way from one government post to another, accused of making a hash of each, and becoming a byword for haplessness in a golden age of political blundering in Britain.”