Tory ex-ministers defend record as pressure mounts after Afghan data leak
Shadow justice secretary and former immigration minister Robert Jenrick said he first learned of the 2022 data breach after a legal gagging order had been put in place the following year.
Former home secretary Suella Braverman said there is 'much more that needs to be said about the conduct of the MoD (Ministry of Defence), both ministers and officials' and that she was not involved in the superinjunction decision.
Ex-veterans minister Johnny Mercer claimed he had 'receipts' regarding the previous government's actions in relation to Kabul but said it was 'absurd' to accuse him of failing to grasp the scale of the crisis.
'I know who is covering their tracks, and who has the courage to be honest,' he said.
'I would caution those who might attempt to rewrite history.'
Thousands of people are being relocated to the UK as part of an £850 million scheme set up after the leak, which was kept secret as a result of a superinjunction imposed in 2023 which was only lifted on Tuesday.
At Prime Minister's Questions, Sir Keir Starmer insisted there would be scrutiny of the decision, telling MPs: 'Ministers who served under the party opposite have serious questions to answer about how this was ever allowed to happen.'
Former prime minister Liz Truss, who was foreign secretary at the time of the breach in February 2022, but a backbencher when the superinjunction was sought, said she was 'shocked' by the 'cover-up'.
She said the revelations pointed to a 'huge betrayal of public trust' and 'those responsible in both governments and the bureaucracy need to be held to account'.
Mr Mercer said: 'I've spilt my own blood fighting for a better Afghanistan, lost friends, fought to get operators out of the country and away from the Taliban, and visited hundreds of resettled families and hotels in the UK under direct commission from the previous prime minister after the schemes were dangerously failing.
'Others were with me in this process and we have all the receipts.'
Shadow justice secretary Mr Jenrick said he had 'strongly opposed plans to bring over' thousands of Afghan nationals during 'internal government discussions in the short period before my resignation' in December 2023.
'I first learned of the data leak and plan to resettle people after the superinjunction was in place,' he said.
'Parliamentary privilege is not unlimited; I was bound by the Official Secrets Act.'
Mr Jenrick said the secret scheme had been 'a complete disaster' and that the previous government 'made serious mistakes' but that 'thousands more (Afghan people) have come since Labour came to power'.
The Commons Defence Committee will be setting out plans for an inquiry straight after the parliamentary recess in September.
A dataset of 18,714 who applied for the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (Arap) scheme was released in February 2022 by a defence official who emailed a file outside authorised government systems.
The Ministry of Defence only became aware of the blunder when excerpts from the dataset were posted anonymously on a Facebook group in August 2023, and a superinjunction was granted at the High Court in an attempt to prevent the Taliban from finding out about the leak.
Then-defence secretary Sir Ben Wallace said he had applied for a four-month standard injunction shortly before leaving office but, on September 1 2023, when Grant Shapps took the role, the government was given a superinjunction.
Mr Shapps has not yet publicly commented on the revelations.
Sir Ben has insisted he makes 'no apology' for applying for the initial injunction, saying it was motivated by the need to protect people in Afghanistan whose safety was at risk.
The leak led to the creation of a secret Afghan relocation scheme – the Afghanistan Response Route – in April 2024.
The scheme is understood to have cost about £400 million so far, with a projected final cost of about £850 million.
The key facts on the Afghan Resettlement data incident that took place in 2022, and the action we are taking to support those impacted.
Defence Minister @LukePollard explains 👇 pic.twitter.com/DY3SbBSmgp
— Ministry of Defence 🇬🇧 (@DefenceHQ) July 16, 2025
A total of about 6,900 people are expected to be relocated by the end of the scheme.
The official responsible for the email error was moved to a new role but not sacked.
The superinjunction was in place for almost two years, covering Labour and Conservative governments.
Tory leader Kemi Badenoch has apologised on behalf of the Conservatives for the leak, telling LBC: 'On behalf of the government and on behalf of the British people, yes, because somebody made a terrible mistake and names were put out there … and we are sorry for that.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BBC News
8 minutes ago
- BBC News
MoD chief to leave in wake of Afghan data breach
The chief civil servant at the Ministry of Defence will be replaced in the wake of the Afghan data breach, the department has move follows one of the worst UK data breaches for decades being revealed to the public earlier this month, in a major embarrassment for defence and intelligence leak, which went undetected for months and was then subject to a super-injunction, put the identities of British spies, soldiers, and vulnerable Afghan allies at Secretary David Williams will leave this autumn and recruitment for his successor has started, the MoD confirmed. The BBC understands Williams' departure was agreed before the leak became leak happened when an official working at UK Special Forces headquarters accidentally emailed out a spreadsheet containing the personal details of almost 19,000 people seeking refuge from the with the Afghan nationals, the details of more than 100 British officials were compromised, including special forces and MI6 personnel, in February injunction blocked reporting of the matter until it was lifted earlier this MP and chairman of the defence select committee, Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi, said Mr Williams' "many years of dedicated public service deserve respect", notwithstanding the seriousness of the leak."While our committee has agreed to inquire into this shocking situation, we have yet to determine the full scope for that, including who will be called to give evidence," he added."The fact that this breach has put at risk our courageous British service personnel and the Afghans who bravely supported them, makes the situation even more shocking."I am sure the committee will want to investigate and understand how this could have been allowed to happen."An MoD spokesperson said on Friday: "Permanent Secretary David Williams will step down this autumn and the recruitment process for his successor is under way."Since 2021, David has led the department through a period of significant activity, and we thank him for his contribution." Sign up for our Politics Essential newsletter to keep up with the inner workings of Westminster and beyond.
North Wales Chronicle
9 minutes ago
- North Wales Chronicle
Tulip Siddiq has had no ‘official confirmation' of Bangladesh trial, say lawyers
The Labour MP is due to face corruption allegations in the country on August 11, according to media reports. In April, it was reported that Bangladesh's Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) had sought an arrest warrant over allegations that Ms Siddiq illegally received a 7,200 square feet plot of land in the country's capital, Dhaka. Ms Siddiq's aunt, Sheikh Hasina, served as prime minister of Bangladesh until she was ousted in the summer of 2024, since when she has been living in exile in India. A statement released by Ms Siddiq's lawyers attacked the 'longstanding politically motivated smear campaign'. 'For nearly a year now, the Bangladesh authorities have been making false allegations against Tulip Siddiq,' the statement said. 'Ms Siddiq has not been contacted or received any official communication from the court and does not and has never owned any plot of land in Purbachal. 'This longstanding politically motivated smear campaign has included repeated briefings to the media, a refusal to respond to formal legal correspondence, and a failure to seek any meeting with or question Ms Siddiq during the recent visit by the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) to the United Kingdom. Such conduct is wholly incompatible with the standards of a fair, lawful, and credible investigation. 'In light of these facts, it is now time for the Chief Adviser and the ACC to end this baseless and defamatory effort to damage Ms Siddiq's reputation and obstruct her work in public service.' A source close to Ms Siddiq said that media reports published on Thursday were the first she had heard of the trial. The Hampstead and Highgate MP resigned from her ministerial job in the Treasury earlier this year following an investigation by the Prime Minister's ethics adviser into her links to Ms Hasina's regime, which was overthrown last year. She came under scrutiny over her use of properties in London linked to her aunt's allies. Although Sir Laurie Magnus concluded that she had not breached the Ministerial Code, he advised Sir Keir Starmer to reconsider Ms Siddiq's responsibilities. Ms Siddiq chose to resign, saying she had become 'a distraction' from the Government's agenda.
The Independent
9 minutes ago
- The Independent
Has Labour made any progress at all on irregular migration?
T he number of people crossing the English Channel to claim asylum in small boats has reached a record high. More than ever – some 25,000 – have made the journey since the beginning of the year, and, if this continues, we will see the highest annual total since records began in 2018. A year ago, Labour pledged to 'smash the gangs' and to 'turn the page and restore order to the asylum system so that it operates swiftly, firmly, and fairly'. There has been some progress, but it's fair to say that many feel impatient. Is it really that many? Yes and no. The 25,000 or so who've arrived on the south coast so far this year mean that the number is up by 51 per cent on this point in 2024 (16,842) and 73 per cent higher than at the same point in 2023 (14,732). So the country is well on course to exceed the figure of 37,000 who arrived by these irregular means last year, and the 46,000 in 2021, the prior record. On the other hand, it is far lower than the number of migrants arriving on a visa, entirely lawfully – some 431,000 net (938,000 gross, both figures including students) – and has to be set in the context of the UK's total population of 69 million. The number of irregular migrants last year was equal to the population of Guildford. On balance, it is still the case that migration of all kinds into the UK has been running at historically high levels for some years. Why so high? In terms of the big picture, on total migration, it is simply that the UK suffers from chronic labour and skills shortages – there aren't sufficient young people to replace retirees, so that means there are not enough workers. In addition, there are not enough with the right skills and in locations where demand is high, while those who do have the skills required are not always willing to do the jobs that are available at current wage rates. In the case of asylum seekers, the recent run of calm weather has certainly pushed the flows higher, and there is no shortage of civil wars and collapsing societies that are pushing them towards the UK. The stories about the Afghan refugees that made headlines in July are an extreme example of a wider phenomenon. There are lots of perfectly genuine refugees, in other words, as well as those who just want a better life. Has the government smashed the gangs? Evidently not, and certainly not to the extent required to stop the boats, but the authorities have been given the 'counterterrorism-style powers' and resources that Keir Starmer promised them. At best, it will take time. What about the returns policy? The one-in, one-out deal with France would reduce irregular migration, but it would have no net impact on the overall numbers. It's also relatively small – initially 50 a week, as opposed to the 898 who arrived last Wednesday alone. What happened to 'safe and secure routes'? This idea was quietly dropped by Labour in the months before the election because it wouldn't actually get the numbers down, which is what it's all supposed to be about. Clearing the backlog? Again, it will take time. There were a large number of unprocessed asylum seekers who were due to be deported to Rwanda and were being kept in limbo in hotels, and the number still arriving is such that it's like trying to empty a bath while the taps are running. The home secretary, Yvette Cooper, says she has taken on more people to process claims, and some have been returned, either by force (8,590 in the year to March) or voluntarily (26,388 in the same period). International obligations and domestic law, as well as humanitarian considerations, require that all claims be assessed, and again, it will necessarily take time if so many have been left unchecked for so long. Even summary deportation is problematic, and this can also take time if the country of origin refuses entry and there are no third countries available to accept someone. Why don't we use the Royal Navy to tow them back to France? It's not what the navy is for, but also the risk to life is great, and the number of small boats would make the task impossible. British warships or Border Force vessels cannot enter French sovereign waters without permission, and the French government would retaliate. The Royal Australian Navy did take migrants into international waters, but this isn't applicable in the narrow English Channel, so that's not practical either. Why use hotels? Simply because there's nowhere else to put them, and accommodating them in tents in fields, as suggested by the Reform mayor of Lincolnshire, Andrea Jenkyns, would cause even more problems. Hotels are unpopular for understandable reasons, but so is paying to rent private houses, especially as homes of multiple occupation, or using much-needed social housing. Cooper has also promised to end the use of hotels, with the one in Epping that's been the subject of protests now an 'urgent priority'. What do the public think? Concern about immigration of all kinds has been growing, and when the small-boat figures go up, or when there are high-profile incidents involving migrant hotels, as now, the salience of the issue trends to increase in the opinion polls. The most obvious sign of dissatisfaction is the rise in support for Reform UK, even though its solutions – leaving the European Convention on Human Rights, 'sending them back to France', 'turning them back' or sending them to some unnamed third country – haven't necessarily been fully thought through. Indeed, they could make matters worse by encouraging the small boats to make undetected landings rather than surrendering to Border Force and making a claim. This increases the likelihood that these refugees would then end up in the hands of gang masters in the illegal economy, and living in slums, adding to crime. And if the boats were ever stopped, there are other routes, such as overstaying a visa. After all, the small boats only became the preferred method after the Channel authorities made the ports and lorries secure, and then the pandemic – plus Brexit – also made smuggling in vehicles, previously a popular tactic, almost impossible. What no party fully admits is that irregular migration is such an intractable problem that if it were as easy to solve it as is so often claimed, it would by now be a thing of the past. The solution would probably involve using every possible policy lever tried so far, and also introducing identity cards to prevent illegal working – a far bigger 'pull factor' than the welfare system. Another idea would be to allow the immigrants to relieve Britain's labour shortage, which includes unskilled work, thus boosting economic growth and tax revenues. Why not?
