Kemi Badenoch has been launching a few more grenades into the Post Office row, with a bullish statement in the House of Commons dismissing the allegations made at the weekend by Henry Staunton. The former Post Office chair had claimed an official had asked him slow compensation payments to victims of the Horizon scandal until after the next election, and that the Business Secretary had told him ‘someone’s got to take the rap for this’ when she sacked him, and that he had been sacked because he had opposed a government attempt to install a Whitehall insider onto the board.

But Badenoch told MPs this afternoon that ‘these allegations are completely false’, including that she refused to apologise to him for the way he learned about his dismissal from Sky News.

In the call he referenced, I made it abundantly clear that I disapproved of the media breaking any aspects of this story and out of respect for Henry Staunton’s reputation, I went to great pains to make my concerns about his conduct private. In fact, in my interviews with the press, I repeatedly said that I refuse to carry out HR in public. That is why it is so disappointing that he’s chosen to spread a series of falsehoods.

She said the way he had gone to journalists and made these claims about confidential discussions, ‘confirms in my mind that I made the correct decision in dismissing’ him. The minister also contradicted Staunton’s claim that she had told him someone had to ‘take the rap’ for the Horizon scandal. ‘That was not the reason at all,’ she said. ‘I dismissed him because there were serious concerns about his behaviour as chair, including those raised from other directors on the board. My department found significant governance issues.’ She later insisted that Staunton ‘was not doing a good job’.

There was no ground to be given. Badenoch rarely offers that kind of response, and she wasn’t doing it today. She ended up having a scrap with Labour’s Kevan Jones (also fond of a scrap) over who should ‘get off Twitter’. The opposition MP had complained that she couldn’t accuse Staunton of lying without publishing all of the correspondence between the government and the Post Office. He added:

And can I just say to her also from her obsession with tweeting, when she says people are jumping on the bandwagon on this, some of us have been involved in this for many years on a cross-party basis, working with people like her colleague, the member for Malton, can I just say that’s quite insulting. But what her tone today will send to the sub-postmasters, it’s more cover-up, more obfuscation. So get out there, explain what’s going on, and give the information, otherwise you will not have the trust, it’s just more of the same we’ve seen over many, many years.

Badenoch shot back that:

I completely reject the assertions that the hon. Gentleman has made. And this is the political point-scoring which I talked about earlier, which we need to reach, we just need to stop here, rather than focus on the issue. He’s talking about my tweeting. I think maybe he should get off Twitter and actually listen to what I’m saying at the despatch box.

She did say that while the government wouldn’t publish all the correspondence, some of the documents relating to the claims made by Staunton might be published.

The Chamber wasn’t packed, presumably because MPs thought the main drama would continue on Twitter rather than on the green benches. The Tories who had turned up were largely there to support the Secretary of State with helpful questions. She in turn complained that ‘from the heckling, we can see that a lot of [the opposition MPs] came here thinking that they could get political points scored, and I’m not allowing that to happen’.

Not allowing something to happen is a good summary of how Badenoch approaches being a minister and communicating what she’s doing. Unlike many of her government colleagues, she doesn’t allow people to criticise her approach without going on Twitter to offer a rapid rebuttal service. She operates like a one-woman political attack and rebuttal unit, which is striking for a minister, but which would be extraordinary if, as many of her colleagues hope, she becomes leader of her party.