Tory ex-ministers defend record after PM demands ‘answers' over Afghan data leak
Former immigration minister Robert Jenrick said he first learned of the data breach, which saw a defence official release details of almost 19,000 people seeking to flee Afghanistan, after a legal gagging order had been imposed.
Ex-veterans minister Johnny Mercer claimed he had 'receipts' regarding the former Conservative administration's actions in relation to Kabul but said it was 'absurd' to accuse him of failing grasp the scale of 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 the result of a superinjunction imposed in 2023 which was only lifted on Tuesday.
At Prime Minister's Questions, Sir Keir insisted there would be scrutiny, which the Conservatives should welcome.
'Ministers who served under the party opposite have serious questions to answer about how this was ever allowed to happen,' he told MPs.
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 the plans to bring over 24,000 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.'
'Contrary to what some have suggested, the Afghan individuals I helped came on the Arap (Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy) scheme and had nothing to do with the subsequent ARR scheme caused by the data leak,' he added.
Commons Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle has said the 'episode' raises 'significant constitutional issues'.
Earlier on Wednesday, Downing Street declined to say what questions former ministers should face but said Sir Keir was 'angry' about the breach.
Sir Keir's press secretary said: 'The Prime Minister is angry at such a terrible breach that had such grave consequences being allowed to happen.
'Which is why it's clear that there are questions that need to be answered by Conservative ministers who, in their own words, have talked about the ineptitude of the Conservative government at the time.'
She also pointed to comments from Mr Mercer, who described the handling of the breach as 'farcical' and 'the most hapless display of incompetence by successive ministers and officials that I saw in my time in government'.
The Commons Defence Committee will be setting out plans for an inquiry straight after the parliamentary recess in September.
Committee chairman Tan Dhesi said: 'These shocking events now deserve proper, thorough parliamentary scrutiny to ensure that lessons are learned.
'I have consulted my cross-party colleagues on the Defence Committee and we all agree that this is work we intend to lead.'
Tory former defence secretary Sir Ben Wallace said he makes 'no apology' for applying for the initial injunction and insisted it was 'not a cover-up' but was motivated by the need to protect people in Afghanistan whose safety was at risk.
A dataset of 18,714 who applied for Arap 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 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.
Sir Ben said he did now know why the superinjunction was granted 'but nevertheless, I think the point here is I took a decision that the most important priority was to protect those people who could have been or were exposed by this data leak in Afghanistan, living amongst the Taliban who had no regard for their safety, or indeed potentially could torture them or murder them', he told BBC Radio 4's Today programme.
He also defended his actions in an article in the Daily Telegraph newspaper.
'I make no apology for applying to the court for an injunction at the time. It was not, as some are childishly trying to claim, a cover-up,' he said.
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.
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.
Defence Secretary John Healey said he was not going to 'lead a witch hunt after a defence official'.
'This is much bigger than the mistake of an individual,' he told the BBC.
The superinjunction was in place for almost two years, covering Labour and Conservative governments.
Kemi Badenoch has apologised on behalf of the Conservatives for the leak.
'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,' she told LBC.
Between 80,000 and 100,000 people, including the estimated number of family members of the Arap applicants, were affected by the breach and could be at risk of harassment, torture or death if the Taliban obtained their data, judges said in June 2024.
However, an independent review, commissioned by the Government in January 2025, concluded last month that the dataset is 'unlikely to significantly shift Taliban understanding of individuals who may be of interest to them'.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
17 minutes ago
- The Independent
Keir Starmer will fight Corbyn's new party by copying Emmanuel Macron
It is easy to mock the new party launched in a struggle between its joint figureheads, but that is no reason to pass up the chance. It takes a special skill for one figurehead (Zarah Sultana) to announce the founding of a new party only for the other figurehead (Jeremy Corbyn) to deny, a day later, that it had happened (' discussions are ongoing '). Then, when Corbyn, three weeks later, announced that it was indeed ' time for a new kind of political party ', which appeared to be called Your Party because that was the name of the website, Sultana snapped on social media: ' It's not called Your Party!' It turned out that Your Party was a placeholder name and the real name will be decided democratically at the inaugural conference, details TBC. Mockery is always useful, because it reminds us how incapable the Corbynite tendency usually is at organising anything more complicated than a split. But it cannot be the whole story, because we know two other things. One is that there is a big pool of potential support for soft Corbynism, if it can suppress the doctrinaire Marxism, the disdain for Britain and the accusation of antisemitism (denied by Corbyn, of course) that is never far from the surface. The other is that Corbyn's allies showed that they could, briefly, run a competent general election campaign when they came close to unseating Theresa May in 2017. So the Not-Your-Party could be a force to be reckoned with. According to some opinion polls, it would take most support away from the Green Party, but it would also siphon votes away from Labour. It is all very well Peter Kyle, the science secretary, describing his former leader as ' not a serious politician ', but Labour has to take the threat from the new party seriously. It is doing so. Keir Starmer has been criticised – not least by Sultana – for copying Farage and thereby pushing Labour voters who are repelled by Reform in her direction. But I think this is to get Starmer's strategy the wrong way round. He knows that part of Labour's electoral coalition is repelled by Farage, but he wants to use that force of magnetic repulsion to try to keep hold of those voters, not to drive them away. This is what might be called the 'Emmanuel Macron' strategy. Macron twice fought off a threat from Jean-Luc Mélenchon, the French equivalent of Corbyn-Sultana, by becoming the leading candidate against Marine Le Pen, the anti-immigration candidate of the party formerly known as the Front National. In 2017, and again in 2022, Macron came top in a divided field (winning just 24 per cent and 28 per cent of the vote) in the first round, forcing voters to choose between him, a centrist with roots in the Socialist Party, and Le Pen, regarded with horror by polite French opinion. Each time, he won the run-off vote comfortably. By running against Le Pen, Macron was able to unite a coalition stretching from Mélenchon through Macron's former socialists to the remnants of the establishment conservatives. Starmer wants to fight the next general election as, in effect, a presidential run-off contest between him and Farage. He knows that the threat of Farage as prime minister is his most powerful weapon. Presenting the election as a contest between Starmer and Farage is the best way of squeezing not just the Corbyn-Sultana vote, but the Green Party vote and even that of the Liberal Democrats and the Conservatives. The one point on which apologists for the Corbyn-Sultana party become evasive is when they are asked if they would be helping to let Farage in. That is the irresistible logic of the first-past-the-post voting system, but they have to try to deny it to keep their dream alive. Most longstanding Corbynites understand this very well. That is why Corbyn was so reluctant to launch the new party, which some of his acolytes were keen to do the moment he won his Islington North constituency as an independent last year. He knows that the only reason he nearly succeeded in 2017 was that his supporters had taken over the Labour Party. An outfit outside the party, on the other hand, will quickly discover that support for Gaza and anti-capitalism, however wide, is not deep. If Farage's popularity holds up, the next election will be decided in seats that are contested between Labour and Reform; in those seats, a vote for the new party will be a vote for Farage. It will be time, as Macron said in France, for all good people to rally to the cause of defeating anti-immigrant authoritarianism. That is a message that could work for Starmer here with voters otherwise tempted to vote Tory, Lib Dem, Green – and with voters attracted to whatever the Corbyn-Sultana party ends up being called.
The Independent
17 minutes ago
- The Independent
Free childcare crisis as surge in demand leaves Labour with funding black hole
Ministers have been warned the childcare sector is at risk of 'collapse' after a boom in demand for free care left a major government scheme in financial peril. A plan to expand free childcare for British families is set to cost the government an extra £1bn per year at a time when ministers are grappling to fill the gaping black hole in public finances. Labour has not spelled out how the funding gap will be filled, but experts predict the shortfall will create 'substantial pressure' on the government and could put the entire childcare sector under threat. In an exclusive interview with The Independent, Bridget Phillipson insisted the unexpectedly high take-up – a quarter higher than predicted – was a 'good problem to have' and would not leave children without places. But the education secretary could not guarantee that parents would get a space at their local nursery in September, when the scheme expands to offer eligible children aged nine months and older 30 hours a week of free childcare. Industry leaders said parents would be left 'disappointed' while nurseries warned a a lack of staff meant they were already struggling to deliver the government's pledge. CEO of the Early Years Alliance Neil Leitch told The Independent: 'One thing is absolutely clear: if 80 per cent of all hours delivered are government hours, and those hours are inadequately funded, the infrastructure will collapse over a period of time. 'I can't say it will be one year or five years, but you can bet your bottom dollar if you don't give somebody enough money to deliver a service, at some point they stop.' Figures published in March show the number of people newly entitled to free childcare was 26 per cent higher than originally estimated – 379,000 compared to 302,000. This meant that the Department for Education spent £2bn on the policy last year, up from a planned £1.6bn. But this is only set to grow as further hours of free childcare are rolled out. According to the highly-respected Institute for Fiscal Studies, the cost of extending free childcare to under-3s could end up costing £1bn more a year than previously expected, from 2026/7 onwards – up from around £4bn to approximately £5bn. A boost to funding announced in Rachel Reeves' Spending Review, of £640 million, would 'go some way to filling this gap… (but) could still leave substantial pressure from higher-than-expected take-up', the IFS said. Associate director Christine Farquharson said the DfE will still likely face 'difficult choices' within its budget and may have to 'trim back' spending in other areas to meet its childcare commitments. 'They have a fixed pot of money. When one thing becomes more expensive, that puts more pressure on other areas of the [education] budget,' she told The Independent. Ms Farquharson said predictions for how many parents would take up the free hours were 'complex' but added: 'It does seem like [the Tories] underestimated take-up pretty systematically.' It is just one of many financial decisions facing the chancellor ahead of the autumn Budget after planned welfare cuts, aimed at saving £5bn annually, were reversed. Ms Reeves is being pushed to bend her rules on borrowing or to rise taxes to keep public finances on track. The free childcare policy was launched in December 2023 with great fanfare under former Tory chancellor Jeremy Hunt. The first stage was put in place from September 2024, when the government extended 15 hours a week of free term-time childcare to working parents with a child aged nine months and over. From September, that will be extended to 30 hours a week . Labour say they were left a 'pledge without a plan' when they entered government. Ministers have been working to massively expand the number of nursery spaces and staff but the task has been made more difficult by the fact that, unlike schools, many nurseries are private providers. But industry leaders warned that, with 8 in 10 of all nursery hours soon set to be paid for by the government, the infrastructure was at risk of 'collapse' without more money. The sector has already been forced to absorb huge additional costs in recent years, including April's national insurance rise, it warned. Childcare in the UK is one of the most expensive in the world, according to the OECD. Mr Leitch added: 'What we have to bear in mind is that we've already got a recruitment and retention crisis. The reality is, many settings don't have the people to be able to accommodate those additional hours. So I'm afraid there will be parents that will be disappointed.' Sarah Ronan, the director of the Early Education and Childcare Coalition, said the IFS was right to sound the alarm, adding that if the government did not match demand with funding it is leaving providers with 'no choice' but to limit the number of places they offer – or raise fees. 'The harsh reality is that if providers don't do that, they'll face closure and then we'll have an even worse crisis on our hands,' she said. Purnima Tanuk, the executive chair of the National Day Nurseries Association (NDNA), said the government's ambitions 'will be put at risk if there is not sufficient investment in early years.' She added that 'almost 70 per cent of nurseries told us that staff shortages mean they cannot offer the children's places they have room to deliver'. Munira Wilson, the Lib Dem education spokesperson, said providers had been left 'hanging by a thread and parents (are) facing the prospect of childcare deserts'. 'The government need to ensure that the funding for childcare hours matches the actual costs of delivery,' she said. Official statistics released last week showed a 7.2 per cent increase in early years staff, the largest annual rise since the series began. The Department for Education would not be drawn on where any extra money might come from. But Ms Phillipson insisted she was unafraid of the policy's popularity. She urged families to check what they are are entitled to, adding: 'I want as many parents as possible to take up the offer. It allows parents to juggle work and family life, but it also sets up children to succeed And the demand that parents are showing is a good problem to have, because it also brings economic dividends as well. 'If people are able to work, or work a few more hours… that helps us all as a society as well and it gets economic growth going'. Ms Phillipson has previously warned that, as the policy expands again in September, parents in the first wave might not get their first choice of nursery. Asked if she could say that all parents who want a space would get one, she told The Independent: 'What I can't guarantee is that it will be as close to home as they would like or it will be their first choice, but we're confident that the roll out will go well in September.' Ms Farquharson did add that the higher uptake of free childcare could ultimately be a good sign for the economy, even if it is more expensive in the short term. 'This higher uptake might mean that we're getting a lot more parents moving into paid work because of these entitlements than first predicted,' she said. 'If the goal for this policy is to drive growth, then this would be a fantastic success story.' However, the extent to which that is the case will only become apparent over the next few years, she said. A DfE spokesperson said: "High-quality, affordable childcare plays a vital role in our Plan for Change, which is why early years funding will rise to over £9 billion next year helping us meet our target of getting tens of thousands more children each year ready for school. 'We're backing families with this record investment including a £75 million grant this year to support providers in delivering more places and a 45 per cent uplift in early year pupil premium, building on the real difference this is making for families as highlighted by the Coram survey who say costs for some has halved.'
Telegraph
17 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Recognising Palestine would reward Oct 7 murderers, Starmer told
Sir Keir Starmer will 'reward' the Oct 7 terrorists if he recognises a Palestinian state, Israel's ambassador to the UK has said. Tzipi Hotovely has described proposals for recognising a Palestine state as 'nothing less than a reward for terrorism'. The ambassador, writing for The Telegraph, said that 'Palestinian recognition would be a reward for hostage-taking, for rape, for murder, for burning innocent people alive'. Ms Hotovely added that recognition would also be a 'significant departure from the policy of the US administration ', risking a damaging rift with the White House. She said: 'Terrorists are watching intently and the signal that they are receiving is that their violent tactics yield positive results for them in the UK and the West.' Her intervention came as Jewish faith leaders in Britain told the Prime Minister that recognition 'cannot improve the situation' and would be 'gesture politics'. Jewish faith leaders at the Board of Deputies, Britain's largest Jewish community organisation, have also told Sir Keir not to recognise a Palestinian state. Phil Rosenberg, the board's president, said that Hamas 'will claim recognition of Palestine as a vindication of their murderous rampages and hostage-taking'. Mr Rosenberg, writing for The Telegraph, said 'unilateral recognition cannot be a substitute for the difficult negotiations and concessions needed to realise an enduring peace'. Sir Keir has come under increasing pressure from his own party to recognise a Palestinian state. This week, 131 Labour MPs penned a letter urging their leader to follow Emmanuel Macron, the French president, and announce a plan to recognise a state. Sir Sadiq Khan, the Mayor of London, and Anas Sarwar, the leader of Scottish Labour, have also told the Prime Minister to act immediately. The Labour-led foreign affairs committee also recommended immediate recognition this week, describing it as 'inalienable right'. Cabinet ministers have also reportedly urged the Prime Minister to act on the issue. The setting up of a new Left-wing party under Jeremy Corbyn, pledging to support 'a free and independent Palestine', is also likely to put electoral pressure on Sir Keir. On Saturday, the Prime Minister rejected calls from his party and Mr Macron to recognise a Palestinian state within the next few months. He said that while he was 'unequivocal' about recognising a Palestinian state as part of a peace process, this should come after a ceasefire and the return of Israeli hostages. Sir Keir said recognition 'must be part of a wider plan which ultimately results in a two-state solution and lasting security for Palestinians and Israelis'. The issue is set to dominate Donald Trump's four-day visit to the UK, with Sir Keir due to meet the US president at the latter's Turnberry golf course in Scotland on Monday. He is attempting to finalise a UK-US trade deal with Mr Trump, the general terms of which were set out in May. There are fears within the Government that a disagreement with the president over Palestine recognition, which Mr Trump opposes, could derail the trade deal. Ms Hotovely described recognition as 'an act of grandstanding and virtue-signalling' and accused Mr Macron of 'Napoleonic cosplaying'. She claimed that after any recognition by Western powers, 'a Palestinian state would have all the ingredients of a would-be failed state'.
