logo
#

Latest news with #British government

Monday briefing: How the two-year effort to keep the Afghanistan data breach secret fell apart
Monday briefing: How the two-year effort to keep the Afghanistan data breach secret fell apart

The Guardian

timea day ago

  • Politics
  • The Guardian

Monday briefing: How the two-year effort to keep the Afghanistan data breach secret fell apart

Good morning. It has been described as the worst data breach in British history. A British defence official sent an email in 2022 containing the names and details of more than 18,700 people in Afghanistan who had applied for asylum under the Afghan citizens resettlement scheme; but somehow, some of the information on the spreadsheet was later leaked on a Facebook group. The Afghan people named in that spreadsheet became immediate and obvious targets for reprisals by the Taliban, and so the British government scrambled to resettle 900 individuals affected, along with 3,600 family members. While the resettlement route is now closed, the government has promised to honour 600 invitations already made to any named person still in Afghanistan and their immediate family. The cost of the whole operation is expected to reach £850m. Amid the shocking details of this scandal, what is perhaps most extraordinary is that, until last week, the majority of the British public had no idea that it had happened. We were not legally allowed to know about the leak, or to know that thousands of Afghans who worked with British forces were put at risk, or to know that thousands were resettled in the UK. This continued for two years because of an unprecedented superinjunction – the longest in British history. To understand the lengths the government went to cover up the crisis and the impact this will have on public trust, I spoke to the Guardian's defence editor Dan Sabbagh That's after the headlines. Health | The NHS is facing an 'absolutely shocking' £27bn bill for maternity failings in England, after a series of hospital scandals, resulting in hundreds of babies and women dying or suffering life-altering conditions, triggered a record level of legal claims. Middle East | Pope Leo XIV has condemned the 'barbarity' of the war in Gaza and the 'indiscriminate use of force' as Gaza's health ministry said at least 85 Palestinians had been killed queueing for food. UK news | More than four decades after the violent policing at Orgreave during the miners' strike and a failed prosecution criticised as a police 'frame up', the government has established an inquiry into the scandal. Protest | Four people were arrested on suspicion of terrorism offences during a pro-Palestine protest in Liverpool city centre on Sunday afternoon, police said. Merseyside police said material in support of campaign group Palestine Action was reportedly seen in the possession of a small number of protesters. UK weather | Half a month's rainfall could hit the UK in the next 24 hours, the Met Office has said. Yellow weather warnings for rain and thunderstorms were in place in Northern Ireland, Scotland and the north and south-west of England until 10pm on Sunday, with more warnings coming into force in other areas on Monday. The previous Conservative government became aware of the leak 18 months after the incident – in August 2023 – after the spreadsheet was published on Facebook. The government then took action to get the post removed, but journalists became quickly aware of the breach, prompting the government to take an extraordinary court injunction to stop the data leak going public. The judge went further, granting the government a superinjunction, a mechanism which prevents disclosure of the very existence of the injunction itself. It's worth noting why this was granted: there are real and founded fears that the Afghans on that list would face retaliation from the Taliban for working with British forces. Yet there are also significant questions to be asked about the length of the injunction, and its scale ('against the whole world'): was it about protecting vulnerable Afghans? Or was it about protecting the British government from scandal? Legal campaigners have condemned the superinjunction for using national security to provide legal cover for what they argue is a political crisis. The legal injunction came into force in September 2023, and 'the Tories let it run,' Dan Sabbagh tells me. 'The timeline shows they wanted it hushed until after the election. Mr Justice Chamberlain rules twice to maintain the injunction, then a third time says, 'no, it's too big'. That's around May 2024. The election is called around then, but the government appeals and delays it past the election.' Dan spoke of his astonishment that a leak of such a serious nature was covered up for years. 'And then on top of that, a remedial scheme was cooked up over a succession of cabinet meetings, expanding in size, costing more and more money. So a real, massive commitment was being agreed in order to conceal the fact of the error. And all this was kept secret from the press, from parliament, and ultimately the public.' The impact on Afghans There has been a great deal of scrutiny on the secrecy and the impact this will have on the public. I'll get into that with Dan later, because first I want to take the time to highlight the people in Afghanistan whose lives have been devastated by this leak. 'People have previously spoken about the western involvement in Afghanistan, the catastrophic withdrawal and the thousands of people who built their lives around the western presence who had all that taken away. But it's important to know that nowhere near enough of those people were helped. Some of them are still in hiding, some of them have been killed. There's genuine worry about their safety under the Taliban,' Dan said. One Afghan who worked as an interpreter told the Guardian 'it felt like my blood had turned to ice' when he found out his name was leaked. He hasn't been able to bring himself to tell his family of the nightmare they have been engulfed in. Other members of his family are in hiding, some have been killed. Another interpreter simply said: 'The Taliban has been actively hunting down those who worked with UK forces. I am ashamed that I put my children's lives at risk for a foreign power.' The thousands of Afghans who have not been evacuated to Britain are not expected to receive any compensation, according to a report by The Times. Dan was keen to add that Labour have since shut down the scheme that was launched to resettle applicants affected by the leak. 'They've also shut down the other two Afghan schemes. So now there's no legal route to come to the UK from Afghanistan. When Afghans do come, they generally get asylum, so we might see more of them in Calais.' Soldiers and spies named The spreadsheet had a 'key notes' column near the name of every Afghan applicant, providing extra information. This included things such as: 'worked with British military,' 'was Afghan special forces,' 'case expedited,' or even 'secretary of state says no', Dan told me. Sometimes, entries named specific UK figures vouching for people. That's how the names of more than 100 officials and soldiers, as well as a handful of MI6 officers, also got out. 'We couldn't report that until [Thursday] due to residual restrictions. There was another hearing in front of Mr Justice Chamberlain who said, 'I'm now going to hear all this in public.' But the Ministry of Defence immediately wanted an hour in closed session to talk about national security,' Dan said. How useful is this information about British forces and intelligence for Britain's enemies? 'The British state really doesn't like the names of secret service or informants coming out,' he said. The scale of the secrecy While leaks and data breaches are not uncommon, this scandal that followed is unparalleled in its scope. 'The unprecedented bit is the secrecy. The superinjunction to cover up what was initially just a mistake, though potentially dangerous, yes. But then, the extraordinary secrecy, the massive policy response that was also secret, which was kept from parliament, the press and public. It's absolutely unprecedented,' Dan said. Dan told me that much of the decision to keep this a secret was taken by the Conservatives. Ben Wallace was defence secretary until the end of August 2023, and his only role was to seek the injunction. Grant Shapps was in that role through the period of the cover-up and in charge when the superinjunction was being fought, then expanded. Other ministers, such as deputy prime minister Oliver Dowden and armed forces minister James Heappey, also knew, Dan said. The only Labour figures who knew before the election were then shadow defence secretary John Healey and speaker of the House of Commons Lindsay Hoyle, both subject to the superinjunction. Due to the severity of the legal threat, Healey did not tell his party leader Keir Starmer about it. When Labour won the election, they rolled the scheme and injunction for six months, then commissioned a review in January 2025. So what's happened since? Former Tory government ministers, such as Grant Shapps, have since defended the use of the superinjunction, while Keir Starmer said former Conservative ministers have 'serious questions to answer' over the breach. It's hard to properly digest the impact this could have on public trust, Dan added. 'If you believe there's a deep state out there working against the public's interest, this is your proof. And it touches on migration, which is the most politically toxic issue of the moment.' Sign up to First Edition Our morning email breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what's happening and why it matters after newsletter promotion Rowena Mason and Ben Quinn have a cracking report on Reform's 'scattergun campaign' to turn a Tory big beast or two to the cause. Speaking to insiders, they hear how the party has designs on nabbing a Jacob Rees-Mogg, Suella Braverman … or even a Liz Truss. Charlie Lindlar, acting deputy editor, newsletters The power over the planet is wielded by a small number of autocratic states, writes the Guardian's environment editor Fiona Harvey, and their actions, or lack thereof, could determine whether the world succeeds in limiting catastrophic climate change. Aamna Superfoods instinctively feel like one of those things you have to a special shop for. But not so, says Rachel Dixon, in this much-needed piece digging into 17 'overlooked' superfoods, including, apparently, tomatoes? Charlie Can a relationship survive if one partner suddenly goes 'woo-woo'; think, tarot cards, astrology. Well, yes, writes Emma Beddington, but only up to a point. Something my husband can attest to. Aamna Back on the food and drink theme, Elle Hunt went in search of this year's 'drink of the summer' and thinks she's found it. It's not a spicy paloma, nor this godless thing called a BuzzBall, but, she reckons, a Finnish gin concoction. Charlie Golf | Scottie Scheffler had all the time in the world to celebrate his latest major title. Sunday's British Open was never in doubt as golf's number 1 player delivered another dominant performance to win his second major this year and grab the third leg of the career grand slam. Football | England have condemned the 'online poison' of racist abuse directed at the defender Jess Carter during the European Championship in Switzerland and said they will stop taking a knee before matches because 'football needs to find another way to tackle racism'. Football | West Ham have completed the signing of the free agent Kyle Walker‑Peters, whose Southampton contract expired this summer. The former Tottenham full-back joins Graham Potter to continue the Hammers' summer business, which has been slow going so far. The Guardian has 'Revealed: £27bn bill for failings in England's mother and baby care'. The Financial Times leads with 'Downing Street faces forced retreat in Apple encryption battle with US'. The Telegraph says 'Farage: I'll build more jails to clean up streets'. The Times reports 'Reeves set to defy left over call for wealth tax'. The Mail has 'BMA's war chest to fund doctors' strikes'. The Sun leads with 'Fears over Gazza dash to A&E'. Finally, the Mirror reports on racist abuse suffered by England Lioness Jess Carter with 'We stand with Jess'. Has Elon Musk built a Nazi chatbot? Is the extreme output of X's AI chatbot Grok shifting the political dial? Chris Stokel-Walker reports. Sign up for Inside Saturday to see more of Edith Pritchett's cartoons, the best Saturday magazine content and an exclusive look behind the scenes A bit of good news to remind you that the world's not all bad Rachel Reeves is the first female chancellor of the exchequer, but she is far from alone. As the Guardian's economics editor Heather Stewart notes, the commanding heights of economic policymaking in the UK are becoming much less male. The Institute for Government's director is Hannah White, its chief economist, Gemma Tetlow, and the new director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies is Helen Miller. The Resolution Foundation is now run by Ruth Curtice, a former Treasury economist. Rain Newton-Smith, another economist, has the task of repairing the CBI's scandal-rocked reputation as its director general. Two of the four deputy governors of the Bank of England are women, too – as are the leaders of a string of powerful trades unions. 'This female takeover has been a quiet and matter-of-fact one,' Stewart writes, 'but it marks a significant change, very noticeable upon returning to covering the field, after a few years away.' Sign up here for a weekly roundup of The Upside, sent to you every Sunday And finally, the Guardian's puzzles are here to keep you entertained throughout the day. Until tomorrow. Quick crossword Cryptic crossword Wordiply

Superinjunctions must never be used to shroud mistakes
Superinjunctions must never be used to shroud mistakes

Times

time2 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.

UK spent up to €9m keeping Irish pensioners warm last winter
UK spent up to €9m keeping Irish pensioners warm last winter

BreakingNews.ie

time4 days ago

  • Business
  • BreakingNews.ie

UK spent up to €9m keeping Irish pensioners warm last winter

More than 26,000 pensioners in Ireland received fuel allowance payments from the British government last year, worth up to €9 million, new figures have revealed. Individuals in receipt of a UK state pension are eligible for the annual Winter Fuel Payment, regardless of where they live. Those aged under 80 receive £200 (€231), while older pensioners are paid £300 (€346). Advertisement A total of 34,300 recipients were located outside the United Kingdom last year – more than 76 per cent of whom were living in Ireland, according to data released by the British Department of Work and Pensions under freedom of information laws. The payments were worth between €6 million and €9 million, depending on the rate of allowance payable in each case. The country with the next-highest number of residents in receipt of a British state pension was Germany, where 2,190 were paid the fuel allowance last winter. Another 1,630 lived in Italy, and 780 were in Bulgaria. The number of Irish recipients fell by around 5.5 per cent last year after eligibility rules changed, linking the allowance to other benefits paid to those on low incomes, such as pension credit. Advertisement However, the British government rowed back on this decision following criticism by charities, unions and MPs; and universal eligibility has been restored for this winter – although those earning more than £35,000 (€40,410) will have the payment clawed back through taxation. The 26,230 individuals who received the British Winter Fuel Payment in Ireland last year included Irish citizens who previously worked in the UK, making them eligible for the British state pension – often in addition to the Irish state pension. They also include British citizens who may have relocated here. Unlike its UK counterpart, the Irish fuel allowance benefit is means-tested and payable only to pensioners earning less than €524 a week. If they also receive the British Winter Fuel Payment, this is assessed as income in the means test.

Why thousands of Afghans were secretly relocated to the UK
Why thousands of Afghans were secretly relocated to the UK

The Guardian

time4 days ago

  • Politics
  • The Guardian

Why thousands of Afghans were secretly relocated to the UK

This week an email was sent to people in Afghanistan. It told the recipients, who had all worked for British forces in Afghanistan, that some of their personal data 'may have been compromised'. All had applied for asylum in the UK, fearful because their work for Britain made them a target for the Taliban. Now they were told their asylum applications had been leaked into the public domain. They were advised not to take phone calls or respond to messages or emails from unknown contacts, to limit access to their social media, to consider closing their accounts, and to only go online via a private connection. Understandably, they were terrified. Dan Sabbagh, the Guardian's defence and security editor, tells Helen Pidd how 24 hours later, John Healey, the defence secretary, apologised for probably the biggest – and most expensive — data leak in British government history. And the former Afghan judge Marzia Babakarkhail tells Helen about how Afghans fear the data list could could endanger their lives.

Taliban deny arresting or monitoring Afghans after UK data leak
Taliban deny arresting or monitoring Afghans after UK data leak

Al Arabiya

time5 days ago

  • Politics
  • Al Arabiya

Taliban deny arresting or monitoring Afghans after UK data leak

The Taliban government said Thursday it had not 'arrested' or 'monitored' Afghans involved in a secret British resettlement plan after a data breach was revealed this week. 'Nobody has been arrested for their past actions, nobody has been killed and nobody is being monitored for that,' said the government's deputy spokesman, Hamdullah Fitrat. 'Reports of investigation and monitoring of a few people whose data has been leaked are false.'

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