Latest news with #Ben Wallace
Times
3 days ago
- Politics
- Times
Superinjunctions must never be used to shroud mistakes
British forces in Helmand province SUNDAY TIMES PHOTOGRAPHER RICHARD POHLE I n September 2023 a High Court judge granted the British government its first superinjunction. The order by Mr Justice Knowles prevented not only reporting of a terrible data breach but any reference even to the existence of restrictions. The unprecedented measure, extended several times at the request of Conservative and Labour governments, finally lapsed last week, allowing the public to learn that the details of 19,000 Afghans who had worked with the UK before the Taliban retook power had been released on Facebook, putting them and others at risk of torture or death. The mistake by an official in the UK special forces headquarters led the government to launch a secret refugee scheme that relocated to the UK more than 16,000 people compromised by the leak, at a cost of £850 million. The incompetence of the original act, which involved a spreadsheet containing hidden data being shared via email, should not cloud the argument over whether the superinjunction was reasonable. It would have been worse had the individuals affected suffered reprisals from the Taliban. Ben Wallace, then the Tory defence secretary, was undoubtedly terrified of costing lives when he first requested an injunction in August 2023. But as the injunction became a superinjunction, its very existence became a secret. Its lifespan then stretched into two years. Government officials warned the Commons and Lords Speakers not to allow any parliamentary questions hinting at it. The Labour opposition was not informed; nor was the intelligence and security committee or the defence committee. There came an indeterminate point when the interests of the Afghan breach victims faded and the interests of Whitehall officials grew stronger. Mr Justice Chamberlain, who took over the case and ruled in favour of maintaining the restrictions in November 2023, said the superinjunction was 'likely to give rise to the understandable suspicion that the court's processes are being used for the purposes of censorship'. It fell away at midday on Tuesday after a retired deputy chief of defence intelligence, Paul Rimmer, completed a review that concluded the leaked data had not spread as widely as feared and its value to the Taliban, and risk to those named in it, had diminished. Media organisations were allowed to reveal that the resettlement scheme had been hidden even from councils responsible for providing housing at considerable cost to the taxpayer, and that the Ministry of Defence's annual report had been massaged to avoid mentioning that a data incident had been reported to the Information Commissioner's Office. All this is a disgraceful abuse of the original argument over national security and the safety of the Afghans affected. The 2022 breach was a blunder rather than a systemic problem such as the infected blood or Post Office scandal. In those cases elaborate and long-running institutional cover-ups were exposed only thanks to media scrutiny, which eventually forced the government to take responsibility. As Heather Brooke brilliantly argues today, UK officialdom nearly always tends towards obfuscation and non-disclosure. Ministers and civil servants dodge embarrassment wherever they can. We must ensure that the original decision to grant the government a superinjunction is a one-off, not a precedent — and that those who rule us cannot again abuse such a powerful tool.
The Independent
6 days ago
- Politics
- The Independent
Starmer's fury over Afghan data breach as he warns Tories ‘have questions to answer'
Keir Starmer has vented his fury over the cover-up of the catastrophic data breach that risked the lives of up to 100,000 Afghans, as it emerged no one had faced action over the huge blunder. The prime minister said the leak should never have happened and that Tory ministers have 'serious questions to answer', a day after an unprecedented superinjunction was lifted. Ben Wallace, who was defence secretary at the time the draconian legal order was granted, earlier said he took full responsibility for the leak, which happened when an MoD official released a spreadsheet containing the names of 18,000 Afghans "in error". But questions have been raised over why no one has been fired over the breach, which put the lives of those with links to UK forces in danger of reprisals from the Taliban, amid calls for further investigation. It comes as the chair of a powerful Commons committee has written to the Information Commissioner, applying pressure for a rethink on its decision not to investigate the breach, which cost the taxpayer billions in relocating thousands of affected Afghans to the UK. At the start of a tense Prime Minister's Questions, Sir Keir expressed his anger, telling MPs: "We warned in opposition about Conservative management of this policy and yesterday, the defence secretary set out the full extent of the failings that we inherited: a major data breach, a super injunction, a secret route that has already cost hundreds of millions of pounds. "Ministers who served under the party opposite have serious questions to answer about how this was ever allowed to happen." He suggested the Conservatives should "welcome" scrutiny from the Commons Defence Committee, which has vowed to investigate. In a dramatic intervention just hours later, right-wing former home secretary Suella Braverman revealed that there were splits in the Tory government over how to deal with the breach and said she had opposed the superinjunction and the new secret route set up to bring those affected to the UK. In a scathing statement, Ms Braverman condemned the former Tory government, then led by Rishi Sunak, in which she played a major role before she was sacked by the former prime minister. She said: 'There is much more that needs to be said about the conduct of the MoD, both ministers and officials, and the House of Commons is the right place to do so. I hope we have the opportunity soon. 'What has happened is outrageous and must never happen again. We must therefore be very clear about what that was and how it happened. 'The cover-up was wrong, the super injunction was wrong, and the failure to stop unwanted mass immigration has been unforgivable. So, I am sorry: the Conservative government failed you and its leaders let you down. It wasn't good enough then. It's not good enough now.' Mr Sunak, ex-defence secretary Grant Shapps and former armed forces minister James Heappey, who oversaw the cover-up, have all been contacted for comment, but none have broken cover and have all remained silent on the breach. Amid calls for further investigation into the breach, Defence Secretary John Healey said that 'accountability starts now' after admitting that he was uncomfortable with the way that the information had been covered up for three years. The Commons Defence Committee confirmed it would launch its own inquiry, and Dame Chi Onwurah, chair of the Commons committee for science innovation and technology, is writing to the Information Commissioner pushing for an investigation. The Information Commissioner has so far declined to hold its own probe, despite previously issuing a fine of £305,000 for a much smaller MoD data breach. Dame Chi told The Independent: 'A leak of this magnitude is, of course, extremely worrying and the fact that it happened in the Ministry of Defence brings the additional dimension of security concerns. The Defence Select Committee Office (ICO) will be undertaking a full inquiry, in the meantime I will be writing to the Information Commissioner to ask for more details on his office's role in this case.' Jon Baines, a senior data protection specialist at Mishcon de Reya, expressed bafflement at the commissioner's attitude to the breach. He said: 'I have not seen such unanimous bafflement from the data protection commentariat at the ICO's lack of apparent interest. 'There is a potential argument that there is no point in a big fine against the MoD when it would punish the public purse. 'Enforcement is not just about fines. The information commissioner has the power to lay a report before parliament. I have been banging on for years about the issue of hidden data in spreadsheets, and if I were the commissioner, I would be thinking about how I can raise the issue. 'A report before parliament would give them publicity, raise the issue and seize parliament.' The ICO has not responded to The Independent 's request for comment. Meanwhile, a member of the defence select committee has warned against naming and shaming the individual responsible for the breach and said the committee should instead look at a failure of government. Confirming the committee would launch an inquiry, its chair, Labour MP Tan Dhesi, told BBC Radio 4's The World at One Programme: "We want to get to the bottom of what has happened on behalf of parliament, which has been sidelined for too long on this issue.' "Ultimately, I think the fact there has been no parliamentary scrutiny, that nobody's been held to account on this, is just not on at all." Leyton and Wanstead Labour MP Calvin Bailey, who was a key figure in organising flights out of Kabul when allied forces went into a chaotic retreat as the Taliban swept to power in 2021, called for 'proper scrutiny' on the matter. He said: 'We need to go back and give proper scrutiny to everything, not just the data breach, the whole culture management and oversight of the operation, of the extraction recovery, the foreign policy and the military engagement and involvement. 'We will probably find that people were working under duress and pressure, because there were too few people to deal with the crisis.' He also warned that the defence committee was 'best placed to do the necessary work' as a full public inquiry 'would take too long and be too expensive'.
The Independent
6 days ago
- Politics
- The Independent
Healey: Accountability starts now over Afghan data leak and injunction
Defence Secretary John Healey has said that 'accountability starts now' after an injunction blocking reporting about the leak of data on Afghans who supported British forces was lifted. His Tory predecessor, Sir Ben Wallace, has said he makes 'no apology' for applying for the initial injunction and insisted it was 'not a cover-up'. Thousands of people are being relocated to the UK as part of a secret £850 million scheme set up after the breach. Mr Healey was informed of the breach, which dates back to 2022, while in his shadow role in opposition and earlier this year, he commissioned a review that led to the injunction being lifted. 'Accountability starts now, doesn't it, because it allows the proper scrutiny of what went on, the decisions that Ben Wallace took, the decisions I've taken, and the judgments… and any action or accountability that may be appropriate can follow now,' he told BBC Breakfast. A dataset containing the personal information of nearly 19,000 people who applied for the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (Arap) was released 'in error' in February 2022 by a defence official. The Ministry of Defence only became aware of the breach when excerpts from the dataset were posted anonymously on a Facebook group in August 2023, and a super-injunction was granted at the High Court in an attempt to prevent the Taliban from finding out about the leak. Sir Ben said he had applied for a four-month injunction and did not know why it was converted into a super-injunction in September 2023, by which time Grant Shapps had taken over as defence secretary. '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 had defended his decision in an article in the Telegraph. '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 around £400 million so far, with a projected final cost of about £850 million. A total of around 6,900 people are expected to be relocated by the end of the scheme. It is understood that the unnamed official emailed the data outside a secure government system while attempting to verify information, believing the dataset to only have around 150 rows. However, more than 33,000 rows of information were inadvertently sent. Downing Street declined to say on Tuesday whether the official involved had faced disciplinary action or was still employed by the Government. Asked if they had faced any sanctions, Mr 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. He had confirmed the previous day that they were no longer doing the same job on the Afghan brief. The injunction was in place for almost two years, covering Labour and Conservative governments. Mr Healey said he was 'comfortable' he had not misled people but that parliamentary committees would now have a chance to scrutinise the decision he and other ministers before him had made, in remarks to Times Radio. He had offered a 'sincere apology' on behalf of the Government in the Commons on Tuesday, and said he had been 'deeply uncomfortable' being unable to speak about it in Parliament. Kemi Badenoch has said sorry 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'.
Yahoo
6 days ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Healey: Accountability starts now over Afghan data leak and injunction
Defence Secretary John Healey has said that 'accountability starts now' after an injunction blocking reporting about the leak of data on Afghans who supported British forces was lifted. His Tory predecessor, Sir Ben Wallace, has said he makes 'no apology' for applying for the initial injunction and insisted it was 'not a cover-up'. Thousands of people are being relocated to the UK as part of a secret £850 million scheme set up after the breach. Mr Healey was informed of the breach, which dates back to 2022, while in his shadow role in opposition and earlier this year, he commissioned a review that led to the injunction being lifted. 'Accountability starts now, doesn't it, because it allows the proper scrutiny of what went on, the decisions that Ben Wallace took, the decisions I've taken, and the judgments… and any action or accountability that may be appropriate can follow now,' he told BBC Breakfast. A dataset containing the personal information of nearly 19,000 people who applied for the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (Arap) was released 'in error' in February 2022 by a defence official. The Ministry of Defence only became aware of the breach when excerpts from the dataset were posted anonymously on a Facebook group in August 2023, and a super-injunction was granted at the High Court in an attempt to prevent the Taliban from finding out about the leak. Sir Ben said he had applied for a four-month injunction and did not know why it was converted into a super-injunction in September 2023, by which time Grant Shapps had taken over as defence secretary. '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 had defended his decision in an article in the Telegraph. '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 around £400 million so far, with a projected final cost of about £850 million. A total of around 6,900 people are expected to be relocated by the end of the scheme. It is understood that the unnamed official emailed the data outside a secure government system while attempting to verify information, believing the dataset to only have around 150 rows. However, more than 33,000 rows of information were inadvertently sent. Downing Street declined to say on Tuesday whether the official involved had faced disciplinary action or was still employed by the Government. Asked if they had faced any sanctions, Mr 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. He had confirmed the previous day that they were no longer doing the same job on the Afghan brief. The injunction was in place for almost two years, covering Labour and Conservative governments. Mr Healey said he was 'comfortable' he had not misled people but that parliamentary committees would now have a chance to scrutinise the decision he and other ministers before him had made, in remarks to Times Radio. He had offered a 'sincere apology' on behalf of the Government in the Commons on Tuesday, and said he had been 'deeply uncomfortable' being unable to speak about it in Parliament. Kemi Badenoch has said sorry 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'.
The Independent
6 days ago
- Politics
- The Independent
UK politics live: Defence minister warns ‘accountability starts now' after Afghan data breach
Defence secretary John Healey has warned 'accountability starts now' after a data leak put up to 100,000 lives of Afghan lives at risk and prompted thousands of them to come to Britain under a £7bn resettlement scheme. The dataset containing the personal information of almost 19,000 people who applied for the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy was released in error in February 2022 by a defence official. It triggered an operation to bring 16,000 Afghans to the UK - and saw an injunction, later upgraded to a superinjunction, issued that banned the media reporting on the leak in a bid to prevent the Taliban finding out. Put to him that no one had yet taken accountability for what happened, Mr Healey told BBC Breakfast: 'Accountability starts now, doesn't it, because it allows the proper scrutiny of what went on, the decisions that Ben Wallace [former Tory defence secretary] took, the decisions I've taken, and the judgments… and any action or accountability that may be appropriate can follow now.' Writing in The Telegraph, Sir Ben Wallace said the decision to apply for the gagging order was 'not a cover-up' and that if the leak had been reported it would have 'put in peril those we needed to help out'. Farage should show sex offence evidence to the police, Healey says John Healey has said he cannot account for every individual in the UK, but that if Nigel Farage has evidence of sex offences being committed by Afghan migrants he should show it to the police. The Reform UK leader said: 'Among the number who have come are convicted sex offenders. I am not, I promise you, making any of this up.'He did not offer any evidence to support the claim. And Mr Healey told Times Radio: 'I can't account for individuals that are here. No doubt some of them have committed some offences and got into trouble. That's true right across the board.' He added: 'If he's got hard evidence of individuals that pose a risk, he needs to report that information to the run security checks about the backgrounds of those individuals and where they pose those sorts of threats, they're prevented from coming and denied access to Britain." Archie Mitchell16 July 2025 09:23 Defence secretary: Easy option may have been to continue cover-up The defence secretary has said the easy option would have been to keep a gagging order in place, but said there can be no democracy with superinjunctions active. John Healey praised the work he had done to allow the lifting of the gagging order on the secret relocation scheme for those affected by the catastrophic leaking of personal data by the Ministry of Defence. He said without the report he commissioned, the order would not have been he told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: 'You cannot have democracy with super injunctions in place.' He added: 'Quite honestly, if I'd been concerned to protect my position rather than confront the hard realities, the policies and the obligation to taxpayers, it could have been much easier to simply allow this scheme to continue with the superinjunction in place, because nobody would hear anything about it. 'I wouldn't be subject to this sort of cross examination on your program, or, as I was in parliament yesterday for nearly two hours in the House of Commons chamber.' Archie Mitchell16 July 2025 09:23
