The Afghan scheme exposes the state’s rotten core

Share this article

Just when you think it can’t get any worse, it does. Like most Britons, my sense of political optimism and general wellbeing is regularly put to the test by the hellscape of scandal and decline that our democracy has become. What’s really depressing is that, like an abused partner, I’m pretty well desensitised to the constant U-turns and aversion to serious reform – these have become the background music of public life. But sometimes an event causes you to physically step back and marvel at this country’s bottomless appetite for failure and self-sabotage.

Yesterday, it was reported that Britain has secretly granted asylum to almost 24,000 Afghan soldiers and their families, costing us between £5.5 billion and £6 billion. Why? Because their identities had been revealed in the most serious data leak in Britain’s history. 

Those on the list – Afghan soldiers and their families who helped us during the Afghanistan war – were put in grave danger as the ruling Taliban could now identify and hunt down collaborators. And that is just what they have been doing. The Telegraph reports that a ‘senior Taliban official’ has confirmed that the group has been using the list to track down so-called ‘traitors’ and, one can only assume, murder them.

None of this happened that recently, however. The data was leaked in February 2022, when a ‘defence official’ accidentally sent the spreadsheet in question to a group of Afghans in an unauthorised email. The error went unnoticed for 18 months, until a nameless Facebook profile posted excerpts of the document, which were deleted after three days when Whitehall contacted Meta to explain the situation. 

To deal with the fallout, a resettlement scheme for Afghans who had aided us in the fight against the Taliban was established. Such a programme did already exist: the Afghan Relocations and Asylum Policy (Arap). But it was decided that the fresh risk faced by the individuals and families who were exposed in the leak justified the creation of a new scheme. 

We didn’t hear about any of this, though. That’s because the High Court granted the then Conservative government a super-injunction on the matter. This meant that any discussion of the data breach by members of the media was banned. No reporting equals no scandal which equals no embarrassment. The super-injunction was upheld for 683 days until it was lifted this week. 

You can understand why so many people are incensed by this. 

On the one hand, it is a widely held view that Britain owes a debt of gratitude to those who helped us in our fight in Afghanistan. Almost 500 British servicemen and servicewomen died in that conflict, and while debates will continue to be had about the necessity or efficacy of Operation Enduring Freedom, the bravery of the locals who risked their lives to help us ought to be recognised. But we can’t pretend that – like all policy decisions – this doesn’t have costs.

John Healey, the Defence Secretary, has said that, to date, 36,000 Afghans have made use of Arap and other schemes and been accepted for asylum, which is expected to cost us £6bn. Given that it seems likely that we’re all about to pay more tax to plug the Chancellor’s rhetorical black hole, Rachel Reeves’ ‘working people’ might now question if their cash is going to fund their public services or secret asylum schemes created to cover up a disastrous email.

For some, the irritation might extend beyond the cost of the scheme and focus on the potential social and cultural outcomes of such a move. Figures from the Ministry of Justice show that Afghans are more than 20 times more likely to account for sexual offence convictions than British citizens. Per 10,000 Afghans in England and Wales, 102 have been convicted of a violent crime. For UK citizens, it is 16.

This is not to say that importing those who came to our help during the Afghanistan war would necessarily turn swathes of Britain into Kabul, but with unfettered migration already having caused such a huge amount of tension, it would have been nice to have been consulted. Of course, thanks to successive governments concealing how many Afghans are actually in the country, it is hard to know how accurate these figures really are – one more example of how the secrecy has corroded public debate.

And this is the source of what is so utterly rotten about this whole debacle. We shouldn’t be, but we’re used to the state failing – we expect it to. Empty promises are made in the build up to general elections to cut tax, control migration and fix the NHS, but at least such pledges are made and broken in public. 

Granting asylum to tens of thousands of Afghans carries profound implications for our public finances and cultural landscape. So to read the former Defence Secretary Ben Wallace smugly defend his decision to keep all of this private and deride those calling his government’s actions a cover-up as ‘childish’ is the height of disrespect.

What this, the rape gang scandal and the Horizon scandal make one realise is that – despite how it may appear – the state very often doesn’t fail because it is incompetent, but because of its shameless, self-serving priorities. 

What’s that, you want affordable housing? Sorry chum, couldn’t possibly build any more homes – don’t have a permit. Fancy waiting less time for your cancer op? Apologies sir, we can’t make systemic changes to the NHS because junior doctors and Captain Tom. An Overton-window-smashing national scandal that exposes our entrenched cowardice and insecurity? Action stations! Wallace, get the super-injunction – it’s go time.

A state whose only real strength is covering its arse after a scandal is not a sustainable political prospect. Bit by bit, scandal by scandal, people are catching on to this – and they’re furious. The violent scenes after the Southport massacre were appalling, and no amount of public frustration could ever have justified them. Yet tragically, one can imagine these outbursts becoming increasingly common, if the state continues to enrage its citizens in such a manner. We often hear of calm coming before the storm. Let’s hope there’s tranquility after it, too.

Share this article