Ben Wallace today insisted he is not sorry for seeking to block reporting of an extraordinary government operation to smuggle thousands of Afghans to Britain at a projected cost of £7 billion.
The Tory former defence secretary said his “first priority was to protect all those that might be at risk” from retribution by the Taliban after a catastrophic military data leak exposed nearly 19,000 people who had applied for UK sanctuary.
Sir Ben said he “made no apology” for ordering officials to apply for the injunction in August 2023 – although he stressed it was envisaged as lasting for four months and he did not know why it was later upgraded to a super-injunction.
Labour’s Defence
Meanwhile, current Defence Secretary John Healey said the Labour government waited a year to drop the draconian measure because it needed to “get on top of the risks.
After 23 months of being gagged, the Daily Mail has revealed how the projected £7 billion cost was signed off while taxpayers and MPs were kept in the dark.
But the revelation sparked another secrecy row last night as Mr Healey’s emergency explanation to Parliament appeared at odds with facts heard at secret High Court hearings over the last two years.
Operation Rubific
The covert airlift of thousands of Afghans – codenamed Operation Rubific – was launched after the UK military catastrophically lost a database of details of those who had applied for sanctuary in the UK to flee the murderous Taliban.
It put 100,000 “at risk of death,” in the Government’s own words, and also exposed British officials whose details were on the list.
After the Mail was the first newspaper in the world to discover the data breach in August 2023, the Ministry of Defence mounted a cover-up and successfully hushed up the exclusive.
Unprecedented Blackout
They obtained a super-injunction and ever since then, cloaked by the unprecedented news blackout, ministers have been clandestinely running one of the biggest peacetime evacuation missions in modern British history.
Every few weeks, unmarked government charter planes have been landing at airports including Stansted and RAF Brize Norton packed with hundreds of Afghans.
So far 18,500 Afghans whose data was breached have been flown to Britain or are on their way in taxpayer-funded jets.
A total of 23,900 are earmarked for arrival.
Housing Crisis Impact
They are living in MoD homes or hotels until permanent accommodation is found.
More than 70,000 others will be left behind in Afghanistan and will have to fend for themselves after the Government yesterday shut the scheme.
Amid a housing crisis, one in ten of the new arrivals is expected to “enter the homelessness system.
An incredible 20 per cent of all MoD property has been given over to housing Afghans.
Compensation Claims
Incredibly, hundreds of the Afghans rescued by the Government are now poised to sue the UK for leaking their data in the first place – potentially adding a further £1 billion in compensation to the colossal costs.
Adnan Malik from Barings Law, a Manchester firm that already has 1,000 clients ready to sue the Government, said: “Since the super-injunction was lifted, we have heard conflicting information from the UK Government which goes against facts which were previously heard in court.”
“We urge the Ministry of Defence to be clear and transparent with the public about the extent of this fiasco.”
£7 Billion Signed Off
Last October, ministers signed off the £7 billion project which “will mean relocating 25,000 Afghans [and] extend the scheme for another five years at a cost of c.£7bn,” the secret court hearings were told.
The £7 billion figure was used repeatedly throughout the case.
Yesterday, however, as the injunction was lifted, Mr Healey told the Commons the costs were actually only £400 million to £850 million, not £7 billion.
Wallace’s Defence
Speaking on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, Sir Ben said: “When we applied in August 2023, when I was secretary of state, we didn’t apply for superinjunction. We applied for a four-month injunction, a normal injunction.”
He said he had already left office by September 2023 when the injunction was converted into a superinjunction, so does not know why it was converted.
“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,” he added.
Not a Cover-Up
Writing in the Telegraph, Sir Ben said that when he was informed of the “error” he was “determined that the first priority was to protect all those that might be at risk.”
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.
I took the view that if this leak was reported at the time, the existence of the list would put in peril those we needed to help out.
“Some may disagree but imagine if the Taliban had been alerted to the existence of this list. I would dread to think what would have happened.”
Healey’s Explanation
Challenged why the reporting restrictions were not lifted earlier, Mr Healey told Sky News: “Because we came into government a year ago and we had to sort out a situation which we’d not had access to dealing with before.
So that meant getting on top of the risks, the intelligence assessments, the policy complexities, the court papers and the range of Afghan relocation schemes the previous government had put in place.
He added that an independent review by Paul Rimmer had concluded it was “highly unlikely that being a name on this dataset that was lost three-and-a-half years ago increases the risk of being targeted.”
Judge’s Concerns
As politicians try to quell a wave of anger, it can be revealed that Mr Justice Chamberlain, the judge who heard the case, queried the billions being spent saying: “I’m starting to doubt myself… am I going bonkers?”
He questioned the MoD’s demand for secrecy by saying: “This is a resettlement programme for immigrants to the UK.
The judge later stated the superinjunction had “given rise to serious free speech concerns” and created a “scrutiny vacuum.
Security Warnings
Ministers were privately warned areas with Afghan arrivals were “hotspots” for last summer’s riots.
The MoD warned of “the risk of public disorder” after the super-injunction was lifted.
An MoD official last night said there was a distinction between Afghans coming because their data was leaked and those on the list coming here anyway via other relocation schemes.
Parliamentary Anger
Former Conservative leader Sir Iain Duncan Smith said Parliament should have been informed about the leak.
He told the BBC’s World Tonight: “Parliament cannot be ignored for that length of time, we owe a duty to the public to at least have examined this.
Both Kemi Badenoch and John Healey have apologised for the data leak, with the Conservative leader saying sorry on behalf of her party.
Follow for more updates on Britannia Daily
Image Credit:
Official portrait of Rt Hon Ben Wallace MP – Image by UK Parliament, licensed under CC BY 3.0, via Wikimedia Commons.
View Image
