Why did Tulip Siddiq resign? How a property row cost her job

As the controversy surrounding Tulip Siddiq continued to grow, she referred to herself to the UK's independent adviser on Ministerial Standards Sir Laurie Magnus.

In order to save her ministerial career, she would need a complete exoneration by Sir Laurie, which she did not get.

Sir Laurie's report concluded that while there was no evidence that Siddiq had broken the UK's ministerial code, he could not claim she was completely clean either, says The Times.

That report left UK PM Keir Starmer, who put "ethical government" centre of his pitch to this voters, with no other choice but to cut her loose. 

Siddiq is both a colleague and close personal friend to Starmer.

The family

Tulip Siddiq is no ordinary politician. Her aunt, Sheikh Hasina, is the former Bangladeshi prime minister who fled into exile after being deposed last year. Hasina's Awami League party has been accused of siphoning billions of pounds out of the country that was intended for infrastructure projects, says The Times.

In December Bangladesh's anti-corruption commission launched a formal probe, which named Siddiq. Magnus said it was "regrettable" that Siddiq was "not more alert to the potential reputational risks — both to her and the government — arising from her family's association with Bangladesh". The fatal line in his letter to Starmer was simple: "You will want to consider her ongoing responsibilities in light of this." Having an anti-corruption minister who was herself accused of corruption proved to be unsustainable.

The properties

At the centre of the allegations against Siddiq were claims that she had benefited from a series of properties paid for or owned by figures with links to her aunt's Awami League party.

She was given a flat in King's Cross for free; a flat in Hampstead, once used by Siddiq, was gifted to her sister; and she lives and pays rent in a £2.1 million house in Finchley which is owned by a Bangladeshi businessman with political links to her aunt.

Magnus focused his inquiries on the King's Cross flat which Siddiq originally claimed had been given to her by her parents, but subsequently turned out to have been paid for by a developer and associate of figures in the Awami League, says The Times.

The two-bedroom apartment, which is now worth around £650,000, was bought in 2001 for £195,000 by Abdul Motalif and subsequently given to Siddiq.

She maintained that the property had been given to her by her parents but was forced to correct the record when she became a minister after details of the transaction with Motalif became public.

Magnus said that given 20 years had passed since she was given the property it had not been possible to confirm that all of the financial and tax regulations had been followed at the time. He described it as "regrettable" that this "conclusive information is not available".

Magnus also pointed out that Siddiq was asked about her ownership of the King's Cross property by The Mail on Sunday in 2022 but insisted it had been given to her by her parents.

This, he pointed out, was "despite" her having signed a Land Registry transfer form "relating to the gift at the time".

He added that this was an "unfortunate misunderstanding which led to Ms Siddiq's public correction of the origins of her ownership after she became a minister".

The Russia trip

In 2013 Siddiq appeared in a photograph alongside her aunt at a meeting with Vladimir Putin, the Russian president. The photograph was taken during the signing of a billion-dollar arms deal and a nuclear power plant project. Bangladeshi authorities are investigating whether Siddiq helped broker the deal for the Russians to build the plant for an inflated price, allowing her family members to embezzle money from the scheme. Siddiq told Magnus that the visit was "solely for the purpose of joining family and enjoying tourist access to the city".

She said that she had "no involvement in any intergovernmental discussions" between Bangladesh and Russia. Magnus says that he accepts Siddiq's denial of involvement "at face value", while noting that "this visit may form part of investigations in Bangladesh".

Further investigations

Siddiq's relationship with her aunt is being investigated by Bangladesh's Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) that is looking into claims that Hasina and her allies potentially misappropriated billions of pounds from the country, with some of the money used to buy property assets overseas, says The Times.

In the UK the National Crime Agency's International Corruption Unit is helping the ACC identify properties bought using money laundered out of the country in Britain.

The danger for Starmer and the government was that these investigations would likely take many months to complete and could potentially involve Siddiq being questioned.

Magnus conclusions

Magnus judged Siddiq against Starmer's ministerial code of conduct which states that ministers must ensure that "no conflict arises, or could reasonably be perceived to arise, between their public duties and their private interests, financial or otherwise".

He found no breach of the ministerial code but his investigation was, by its very nature, limited. Given the fact that he had just eight days he was unable to obtain "conclusive documentation" about the tax treatment and funding of her properties. He said it is "regrettable" that such information was not available. He also accepted her account of her visit to Moscow and meeting with Putin, in part because there was no evidence to the contrary. But he leaves open the possibility that further evidence could emerge from investigations by the Bangladeshi authorities.

But the critical factor was not whether Siddiq had breached the code itself, but whether a conflict "could reasonably be perceived to arise". On this he was clear. Given her role of anti-corruption minister in the Treasury which included the "probity" of UK's regulatory framework, it was "regrettable that she was not more alert to the potential reputational risks, both to her and the government, arising from her close family's association with Bangladesh".

His final line left Starmer with no choice.

"I would not advise that this shortcoming should be taken as a breach of the ministerial code, but you will want to consider her ongoing responsibilities in the light of this," Magnus wrote.