Keir Starmer's Sue Gray 'sacking' should teach us one lesson about woke politics

The reason why Sue Gray was removed- sorry - redeployed from her position as Keir Starmer's chief of staff remains a source of boiling hot dispute.

That she earned more money than the PM - at a time when special advisers saw their pay held down - was clearly a flashpoint. Then again, bile-flushed insiders were also briefing about power struggles within Downing Street amidst claims Ms Gray had clashed with the likes of cabinet secretary Simon Case and - ouch - Morgan McSweeney who has since replaced her in the role.

One commentator even suggested she had to go because "she knew too much" (me neither). So perhaps we need a Sue Gray report into the removal of Sue Gray.

Yet amidst the grinding of the rumour mill, one idea gaining traction is that Ms Gray had been sacrificed because of a macho culture which is alleged to prevail in Government. It's a view expressed robustly by Baroness Harriet Harman who argued that misogyny was behind the attacks on Gray's character and capabilities.

“I think there is something about an older woman in authority that some young men find hard to put up with,” the Labour grandee nobly (and baselessly) observed.

Of the many reasons offered for Gray's abrupt departure, this surely has to be the most egregious. Since in one lazy swoop it hinges on the assumption that if a woman is pushed from a high position in professional life it can only be because of gender politics. An opinion which can, ironically, lead to women being taken less seriously in the workplace.

Of course there are instances where office Neanderthals still show creaking prejudice towards women. And when this happens it must be called out.

But aren't we confusing this kind of bias with a far simpler explanation for Ms Bray's exit? That, as one Labour insider stated "she simply wasn`t very good at her job". And that for this reason alone, her boss, known for his knee jerk response to failure, told her she had to go. Though allowing her to do so under the cover of feebly protested resignation.

After all, if Sue Gray was as remarkably valuable as we had been led to believe then why would Starmer shunt her off to the part-time, previously non-existent role of prime minister's envoy for nations and regions. In a party so thin on talent, why leave your best player on the bench?

More likely the Prime Minister quickly and coldly realised that what had been perceived as a feather in his cap - securing Boris Johnson's prosecutor in chief - was in fact turning into a weight around his ankle. And she had to go.

Anyway, given we live in times of crippling political correctness, not least amongst our woke-loving Labour leadership, if her departure had been predicated on sexism then it would quickly laid bare.

The fact is Sue Gray blew it and no amount of (traditional) gender politics will obscure this fact. Rather than consolidate her role as an effective, behind-the-scenes fixer who would smoothly aid Labour's transition from opposition into power, she appeared to believe her own hype. As a Rottweiler-style gate keeper allegations quickly circulated of her controlling tendencies and an inability to delegate. Sources also claimed she could be “dismissive” of junior staff, with an instinctive dislike for ambitious high-flyers.

If true, then this damning dossier, rather than the fact she is a woman, is surely why 100 days after the Labour Party won she was clearing her desk. Not least since her party is already fighting fires on so many fronts with the ongoing freebies row and the fact the PM's net satisfaction rating has plummeted to minus 33 after just three months in Downing Street.

Over 100 years after getting the vote women are still doubtless battling for equality in the workplace. But it didn't happen with Sue Gray.

In a truly egalitarian society we have to accept that like men, women in positions of power can still fail their brief. Sue Gray had a chance to wear the trousers. Her failure had nothing to do with biology. Women who suggest otherwise are the ones who also fail us all.