Tory ex-ministers defend record after PM demands ‘answers' over Afghan data leak
Johnny Mercer claimed he had 'receipts' relating to the previous government's handling of Afghanistan (Andrew Matthews/PA)
'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.
Chair, @TanDhesi has responded to the Secretary of State's statement on Afghanistan.
— Defence Committee (@CommonsDefence) July 16, 2025
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.
Former defence secretary Sir Ben Wallace (Ben Birchall/PA)
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 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
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
Spectator
26 minutes ago
- Spectator
Josef Fritzl caused Badenoch to lose faith
'The testing of your faith produces perseverance' – James 1:2-3. That may be the case, but too much testing can also result in secularism apparently. In an interview with the Beeb, Conservative party leader Kemi Badenoch has said that while she was 'never that religious' growing up though would have 'defined myself as a Christian apologist'. She revealed, however, that all this changed in 2008 – due to Josef Fritzl. The Tory leader said that when she discovered what Fritzl had done to his daughter Elizabeth – imprisoning and repeatedly raping her in his basement over 24 years – it changed her attitude to religion forever. Badenoch – whose maternal grandfather was a Methodist minister – stopped believing in God as a result, confiding to the Beeb that: 'I couldn't stop reading this story.' It's not the first time this claim has been made. Last year, Lord Ashcroft published Blue Ambition, in which he documents Badenoch's rise through the ranks of the Conservative party. The Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Badenoch-backer Alex Burghart remarked: That foundation was that God does not test you beyond your endurance. She read about the poor woman who'd been locked in a cellar by her father and how she prayed every day that she'd be rescued. Kemi thought about all the prayers she herself had said, often for trivial and silly things. She told me how she'd have given up every single one of those for the victim not to have experienced the horror that she did. She told me that at that moment, she thought to herself, 'There is no God. If there was, he would have answered her prayers before answering mine.' It's certainly quite the revelation…
Scotsman
27 minutes ago
- Scotsman
Why Chancellor Rachel Reeves must resist pressure to become a left-wing Liz Truss
Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... There is no doubting that Rachel Reeves is in an extremely difficult position – caught between Labour's pre-election promise not to raise taxes on 'working people', party rebellions over proposed benefit cuts, her own 'fiscal rules', and a national debt of £2.7 trillion. Amid these competing pressures, the Chancellor somehow needs to find a way to fill a £51 billion black hole in the government's finances in time for her autumn Budget, according to the National Institute of Economic and Social Research, a leading think tank. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Despite the exhortations of some on the hard-left, the Chancellor must avoid seeking the easy way out by suddenly deciding to throw out the rule book and transforming herself into a sort of left-wing Liz Truss. To be fair to Reeves, she shows no signs of making such a horrendous mistake, but political pressure can do strange things to even normally sensible people. A lettuce covers the face of Liz Truss on a campaign advertising board ahead of last year's general election, when she lost her seat (Picture: Jacob King) | PA Clever ploy that backfired The immediate market reaction to the disastrous mini-budget concocted by Truss and her Chancellor Kwasi Kwarteng in 2022 led to her downfall within weeks. Despite containing an eye-watering £45 billion of unfunded tax cuts, the then Conservative Prime Minister pretended this was not a proper 'Budget' but only a mere 'mini-budget'. They thought this was a clever ploy, as it avoided the need to get an assessment from the Office for Budget Responsibility. However it turned out to be another reason why investors were so worried that the government's plans did not add up. The result was a fall in the value of the pound, rises in both mortgage rates and the cost of UK Government borrowing, and very real pain for ordinary people. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Ideological dreamers on the hard-left and hard-right may refuse to accept the advice of the 'experts' they love to deride, but no Chancellor can afford to be so cavalier and hope to survive in their job for long.
New Statesman
27 minutes ago
- New Statesman
Labour is making Britain a more European country
Illustration by Jonathan McHugh / Ikon Images It was Nigel Lawson who stated the ambition most clearly. Nine years ago, a fortnight after the UK voted to leave the EU, the late Conservative chancellor hailed an opportunity to 'finish the job that Margaret Thatcher started'. For free marketeers, Brexit was the method, the object was to change the country's soul. The description of their vision as 'Singapore-on-Thames' has always been erroneous – this imagined libertarian Disneyland has a highly dirigiste state. But the aim was not in doubt: a Britain in which taxes would be cut, spending reduced and regulations eliminated. Brexit is an increasingly friendless project – Labour MPs note with interest how rarely Reform dares mention it; the last reference on the party's X account was in March. Only 29 per cent of the country, according to a new More in Common poll, would still vote Leave, while 49 per cent favour a referendum on rejoining the EU within the next five years. Far from regarding Keir Starmer's Europe deal as a 'betrayal', most believe it is too modest. Leavers can take solace from the implacability of Labour's red lines: Starmer has suggested there will be no return to the single market, the customs union and free movement in his lifetime. But those on the right who always viewed Brexit as a means rather than an end lack such consolation. If there is anything resembling a clear pattern from Labour's first year in office it might be this: the embrace of a more European-style economy. After Brexit, France and Germany took seriously the threat of acquiring a free-market upstart on their doorstep. In practice, the UK is mirroring them. Start with taxes and spending. As Rachel Reeves likes to remind left-wing critics, she used her first Budget to impose the largest increase in the former since 1993: £41.5bn, or 1.2 per cent of GDP. By 2027-28, the UK, a country traditionally described as having 'US-style taxes', will have a tax take of 37.7 per cent, putting it within touching distance of the Netherlands and Germany (even before Reeves' planned sequel). Public spending will settle at a similarly European level of 43.9 per cent of GDP. A shift that the Conservatives could plead was temporary – owing to the emergencies of the pandemic and the energy crisis – is becoming permanent under Labour. Reeves, fittingly, replaced a portrait of Lawson in her office with one of Ellen Wilkinson, Clement Attlee's education minister and a founding member of the Communist Party of Great Britain. Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe Next turn to workers' rights. Tony Blair once described his government's role as 'to campaign to extend flexible labour markets to the rest of Europe'. Starmer, by contrast, through the Employment Rights Bill, is importing a more continental model: a ban on 'exploitative' zero-hours contracts, an end to 'fire and rehire' and the extension of full rights to workers from day one. Cabinet ministers proudly point out that, far from being 'watered down', the bill has been strengthened in areas such as non-disclosure agreements. Then there is ownership. The UK's aversion to nationalisation under Thatcher and New Labour was yet another dividing line between it and statist Europe. Now Ed Miliband boasts of having established the 'first publicly owned energy company in over 70 years' (GB Energy), and rail franchises – some of them previously held by France and the Netherlands – are being reclaimed by the British state. This European turn could yet extend to welfare. Papers by Labour Together call for the reassertion of the contributory principle – with a far clearer link between what people pay in and what they get out, as is typical on the continent. This, the think tank suggests, would serve as an antidote to populists exploiting a broken social contract – one adviser references the fury of the Inbetweeners actor James Buckley at having to pay for a garden waste collection even as council tax continually rises. A new digital contribution card – recalling the National Insurance stamps once received by employees – is proposed alongside a system of unemployment insurance (potentially set as a share of earnings). Back in 2021, in a 12,000-word essay for the Fabian Society, Starmer championed the 'contribution society', one based on 'being part of something bigger, playing your part, valuing others'. This notion, cabinet ministers such as Liz Kendall and Shabana Mahmood believe, should be central to Labour's philosophy. There are moments when Starmer's often inchoate approach acquires more definition. During his press conference with Emmanuel Macron last month, he spoke of proving 'that social democracy has the answers' in contrast to the 'performative populism' of Nigel Farage. Here was a riposte to those who accuse him of engaging in no act more complex than chasing Reform's tail. But what direction is Starmer heading in? The UK is charting a different course yet Labour has left voters wondering whether this is the product of accident or design. In his first speech as Prime Minister, Starmer vowed to lead a government 'unburdened by doctrine' – an approach that disillusioned MPs contend has left his administration rudderless. 'There's too many concepts floating around at too high a level, which is what happens when intellectual leadership is lacking,' says one. The task facing Labour this autumn is to provide it. Rather than finishing the job that Thatcher started, Starmer has chosen to begin reversing it. He will soon have to tell voters why. [See also: The Online Safety Act humiliates us all] Related
