logo
Ex-minister says no ‘fierce opposition' to Afghan route amid data breach fallout

Ex-minister says no ‘fierce opposition' to Afghan route amid data breach fallout

Independent3 days ago
Conservative ex-ministers offered no 'fierce opposition' to plans to bring Afghan refugees to the UK via a secret route following a data breach, the former armed forces minister has said.
James Heappey, who was armed forces minister at the time the data breach came to light, said claims he had backed a 'new entitlement' for people affected by the breach but not eligible for other schemes were 'untrue'.
His comments on social media on Thursday appeared to contradict those of former immigration minister Robert Jenrick, who said he and former home secretary Suella Braverman had 'strongly opposed' plans for the Afghan Response Route in 'internal meetings'.
But Mr Heappey, himself a former Army officer who served in Afghanistan, said the cross-government committee responsible for the policy 'tried to extend entitlements by the smallest number possible'.
He said: 'This was led by legal advice & I don't recall fierce opposition. There was frustrated resignation that it was necessary.'
Mr Heappey did, however, recall 'rancorous' meetings in which departments 'fought fiercely for their priorities and/or to avoid unresourced responsibility'.
He also denied that a new 'secret route' was not under consideration at the time he resigned as armed forces minister in March 2024.
The data breach, which saw a defence official release the details of nearly 19,000 people seeking to flee Kabul in 2022, became public on Tuesday after an unprecedented superinjunction banning reporting of the breach was lifted.
Since then, Conservative former ministers have sought to distance themselves from the handling of the breach and the subsequent creation of a secret relocation scheme, the Afghanistan Response Route, in April 2024.
Along with Mr Jenrick's claims of having opposed the route prior to his resignation in December 2023, Ms Braverman herself has said there is 'much more that needs to be said about the conduct of the MoD (Ministry of Defence), both ministers and officials'.
Former veterans minister Johnny Mercer claimed he had 'receipts' regarding the previous government's actions in relation to Kabul, and has described the handling of the breach as 'farcical'.
Sir Ben Wallace, who applied for the initial injunction as defence secretary, has said he makes 'no apology' for doing so, saying it was motivated by the need to protect people in Afghanistan whose safety was at risk.
Mr Heappey backed up his former boss, saying the superinjunction was 'needed' to protect people from 'mortal danger'.
He said: 'The intelligence assessment was clear: if the Taliban got their hands on the list, violent and even lethal reprisal was likely.'
Mr Heappey added that, although a review by retired civil servant Paul Rimmer found there was now little threat to those on the list as a result of the breach, this did not mean the threat had never existed.
He also sought to defend the individual responsible for the leak, saying they had been 'incredibly dedicated to those we served with in Afghanistan'.
Grant Shapps, who was defence secretary by the time the superinjunction was granted, has not yet publicly commented on the revelations.
The data breach saw a dataset of 18,714 people who applied for the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (Arap) scheme released in February 2022 by a defence official who emailed a file outside authorised government systems.
Defence sources have said that details of MI6 spies, SAS and special forces personnel were included in the spreadsheet, after they had endorsed Afghans who had applied to be brought to the UK.
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 super-injunction was granted at the High Court in an attempt to prevent the Taliban from finding out about the leak.
The leak also led to the creation of the secret Afghanistan Response Route, which 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.
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.'
Meanwhile, Parliament's Intelligence and Security Committee has demanded to see intelligence assessments relating to the data breach 'immediately' as MPs and peers begin inquiries over the incident.
The Commons Defence Committee has also indicated it will call former ministers to give evidence on the breach, and Mr Heappey said he would be 'happy to contribute' to the committee's inquiry.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Fears Brit couple held hostage by Taliban will die as dad ‘suffers stroke' after months locked up in underground cell
Fears Brit couple held hostage by Taliban will die as dad ‘suffers stroke' after months locked up in underground cell

The Sun

time13 minutes ago

  • The Sun

Fears Brit couple held hostage by Taliban will die as dad ‘suffers stroke' after months locked up in underground cell

AN ELDERLY Brit couple held hostage and beaten by the Taliban could die if not rescued soon, the UN has warned. Peter Reynolds, 80, and his wife Barbie, 76, were snatched by Taliban thugs and tossed into Afghanistan's most notorious prison nearly six months ago - where Peter is believed to have since suffered a stroke. 5 5 The parents-of-four had lived in Afghanistan for 18 years managing training projects, when they were kidnapped on February 1 with no explanation. They were locked up separately at the maximum security Pul-e-Charkhi in Kabul, and later moved to an underground cell beneath the Taliban's intelligence HQ. Eighty-year-old Peter has been chained up, shackled and smacked over the head. Alice Edwards, the UN's special rapporteur on torture, said: 'We see no reason why this elderly couple should be detained at all, and have requested an immediate review of the grounds of their detention. 'It is inhumane to keep them locked up in such degrading conditions and more worrying when their health is so fragile.' Peter had a mini stroke in 2023, and is thought to have suffered another one or a silent heart attack while being held prisoner. Barbie, meanwhile, is struggling with dizzy spells and numbness linked to anaemia - which can be caused by a lack of sunlight. The married couple were moved out from underground last week, but are still forced to sleep on mats on the hard floor - and have been provided on furniture. Alice said: 'Their physical and mental health is deteriorating rapidly. "Without access to adequate medical care they are at risk of irreparable harm or even death.' Notorious Iranian prison is BLITZED as 'Israel blows up gate to Evin jail in bid to free Ayatollah's fiercest critics' In April, Peter described the excruciating conditions as "the nearest thing to hell". In a phone recording heard by The Sunday Times, he said: 'I've been joined up with rapists and murderers by handcuffs and ankle cuffs, including a man who killed his wife and three children, shouting away, a demon-possessed man.' He continued: "The atmosphere is pretty shocking. I am learning a lot about the underbelly of Afghanistan. "The prison guards shout all the time and beat people with a piece of piping. "It's a horrible atmosphere — the nearest thing to hell I can imagine." The Reynolds were some of the only foreigners not to leave Afghanistan when the Taliban seized back power four years ago. They had been living peaceful lives in the mountainous region of Bamain - famous for the giant Buddha statues blown up by the previous Taliban regime. 5 5 Their family said they had never encountered any trouble from the regime since settling there in 2009. Last week was the pair's 55th wedding anniversary. Barbie told a Foreign Office official this week: 'We have been told we are guests of the government but this is no way to treat a guest." Peter and Barbie were arrested on February 1 along with their interpreter, Jaya, and a visiting Chinese-American friend, Faye Hall. The group was detained after flying in a small plane from Kabul to an airstrip near their home in the central province of Bamiyan. They bundled into vans and taken to separate parts of maximum-security Pul-e-Charki. On May 22 the couple were moved to the headquarters of the GDI — the General Directorate of Intelligence — and put in an underground cell. Although the couple are now together, they have had almost no access to phones since being moved. The last time their four children spoke to them was over a month ago. It was initially thought they had been arrested for teaching parenting skills to mothers. The Taliban later bizarrely claimed the arrest was due to a "misunderstanding" - though did not release them. Hall, their interpretor, was released on March 27 following a court order. Following her release the American citizen heaped praises for president Trump. Hall said in a video posted by Trump on Truth Social: "I've never been so proud to be an American citizen. Thank you, Mr President." 5

Home Office social media influencer resigns after it designates Palestine Action a terrorist group
Home Office social media influencer resigns after it designates Palestine Action a terrorist group

Daily Mail​

time13 minutes ago

  • Daily Mail​

Home Office social media influencer resigns after it designates Palestine Action a terrorist group

Former Coronation Street actress and social media influencer has ended her collaboration with the Home Office after the Government designated pro-Palestinian campaign group Palestine Action a terrorist organisation. Nicola Thorp, 36, who has been a vocal advocate for women's safety since surviving a horrific stalking ordeal, said she could no longer 'essentially promote and do PR for' the department. She went on to accuse it of being 'complicit in the most abhorrent acts of violence against women and little girls in Gaza '. The actress-turned-activist had previously worked with the Home Office to promote its strategy to combat violence against women and girls. But in a strongly worded Instagram post, she revealed she had turned down a recent request to help publicise the initiative, which is being led by Labour MP Jess Phillips, now serving as a minister in the department. 'This request came shortly after Yvette Cooper, the Home Secretary, had announced that she would be proscribing Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation,' Ms Thorp explained. 'And it really got me thinking about how I feel about this particular Government.' The outspoken TV star, who played Nicola Rubinstein in the long-running ITV soap, added that while she supports domestic policies aimed at protecting women and girls, she could not in good conscience work with a Government she claims is 'an ally to the IDF [Israel Defense Forces]' and continues to supply 'arms licences to Israel'. 'While I obviously support domestic efforts and policies put in place to reduce violence against women and girls in the UK, their continued supply of arms licences to Israel along with their position as an ally to the IDF is wildly hypocritical,' she said. Ms Thorp, who made headlines last year as a campaigner for the new 'right to know' anti-stalking policy after her own stalker was jailed, said all her previous work with the Home Office had been done on a voluntary basis. Her stalker, schizophrenic Ravinderjit Dhillon, was sentenced to 30 months in jail at Snaresbrook Crown Court in December 2023 after a disturbing two-year campaign of harassment in which he used 27 different online aliases to send her terrifying threats. Including one chilling message that read: 'I'm your Grim Reaper. I'm never going to leave you.' The traumatised actress has since dedicated much of her platform to women's safety but she has increasingly used it to criticise the Government's stance on Gaza and the policing of pro-Palestinian protests in the UK. Sharing a video of an armed officer confronting a man holding a Palestinian flag, Ms Thorp wrote: 'This is Yvette Cooper's Britain.' She called the scene 'unbelievable' and added: 'Where are all the free speech advocates now?' Ms Thorp has also refused an invitation to speak at the Labour Party conference this September on a panel about violence against women and girls hosted by the NSPCC. In her response, she said: 'I have ceased my work with the current Labour Government and will no longer be promoting any of the work they're doing to tackle violence against women and girls.' In the wake of her comments, Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp launched a blistering attack on the former soap star, accusing her of 'virtue signalling' and defending the Government's decision to proscribe Palestine Action. 'Palestine Action is a violent group who want to achieve their political aims through coercion and criminal damage,' Mr Philp said. 'They have sabotaged an RAF aircraft, which our country relies on to defend us, they have smashed up property and they have even attacked a police officer with a sledgehammer. This is all totally unacceptable. 'In this country, we decide issues by debate and elections – not violence and intimidation. Palestine Action's methods should be condemned by anyone who believes in democracy and a peaceful political process. This influencer needs to stop virtue-signalling on Instagram and call out Palestine Action's violent tactics.' The Home Office has declined to comment. In recent years, the Government has increasingly turned to influencers - both paid and unpaid - to promote key policies to younger audiences on platforms like Instagram and TikTok. In 2020, Love Island stars were reportedly paid to promote the NHS Test and Trace scheme.

Rental deposit scheme ‘puts millions in the pockets of landlords'
Rental deposit scheme ‘puts millions in the pockets of landlords'

The Guardian

time13 minutes ago

  • The Guardian

Rental deposit scheme ‘puts millions in the pockets of landlords'

The official deposit scheme for renters is 'putting millions in unscrupulous landlords' pockets', campaigners have said. Almost half (46%) of renters said they did not know they could challenge deposit deductions they deemed to be unfair. Only 4% have used the formal dispute resolution process to try to reclaim the money. Dan Wilson Craw of Generation Rent, the campaign group which conducted the research, said the system was 'failing renters who are put off from challenging unfair deductions by unclear rules, and threats and delaying tactics from landlords'. He added: 'Ultimately, that puts millions more in unscrupulous landlords' pockets. The uncertain timescales and unclear rules of the deposit system, as well as obstructiveness and threats from some landlords, mean that accepting unfair deductions to get some cash back quickly can feel like the better option.' The research, based on a nationally representative survey of 2,000 private renters, found that a quarter of tenants who did not challenge unfair deductions said their landlord either threatened to make a larger claim if they raised a dispute, refused to take part in the adjudication process or had not protected the deposit in the first place. Data from one deposit protection scheme, TDS, showed that 77% of tenants got some of their disputed deposit back and 32% got all of it back. Generation Rent analysis found tenants who disputed deductions won 79% of the disputed money back on average. 'Because challenging deposit deductions is usually worth it, renters put off from doing so are losing hundreds of pounds of their own money,' said Wilson Craw. 'The government's review of deposit protection is an opportunity to build trust in the system so tenants have the confidence to challenge unfair landlord claims.' Landlords must legally put a tenant's deposit in a government-approved tenancy deposit scheme. There is a free dispute resolution service for tenants who disagree with their landlord on how much deposit should be returned. Ministers have said they were reviewing the system and 'identifying areas for improvement'. Generation Rent said it wanted to see a 14-day deadline for deposits to be returned at the end of a tenancy and landlords to be legally compelled to take part in a dispute resolution if a tenant pursued it, with disputes resolved within 10 days. It also said landlords and agents who broke the rules, or made repeated excessive deductions, should face 'meaningful penalties'. The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government has been contacted for comment.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store