Markus Andrews

The number of people evacuated from Afghanistan by British troops has topped 10,000 over the past 13 days, Boris Johnson has announced.The figure was passed as president Joe Biden triggered a final desperate scramble to leave the country by refusing to budge on his 31 August deadline for the withdrawal of US troops.It is thought that as little as 48 hours may remain for evacuation flights before the priority of the UK operation switches to getting the 1,000 strong British military contingent, diplomats and other officials out of the country.The prime minister paid tribute to the work of UK servicemen on the airlift from Kabul airport which began on 13 August as Taliban militants closed on the Afghan capital.“British forces are working tirelessly to support the evacuation operation in Kabul,” said Mr Johnson.“10,291 people have been evacuated from Afghanistan since 13 August, more than 5,500 of which are Afghans and their families.”Foreign secretary Dominic Raab today said that the UK had evacuated around 2,000 people from Kabul within the past 24 hours, and sources in London said the military believed it would be possible to keep that rate up for as long as the airlift continues.In a joint letter to MPs and peers, Mr Raab, defence secretary Ben Wallace and home secretary Priti Patel promised that the “full might of government is being brought to bear” on increasing numbers evacuated, but acknowledged: “This window of opportunity at Kabul Airport for military evacuation will shortly come to a close…“It is the sad reality that many of those who are screened and declared eligible for evacuation may not make it to the airport before our flights end.”Mr Johnson has issued a plea to the Taliban to ensure safe passage for those wanting to leave the country following the withdrawal of international forces, either directly from the airport or via processing hubs in neighbouring countries.He said that future economic and diplomatic support for Afghanistan from the international community will be conditional on the treatment of those trying to flee.As well as UK nationals and Afghans, including interpreters, who have worked with British institutions over the past 20 years, the UK is seeking to evacuate local people who may be vulnerable to Taliban reprisals because of their links to civil society and human rights groups or as women in prominent roles in Afghan society. More

Boris Johnson must urgently rethink the UK’s resettlement scheme for people in Afghanistan to save lives at immediate risk from the Taliban, Nicola Sturgeon has warned.Scotland’s first minister has urged the prime minister to increase the commitment to welcome 5,000 refugees in the next year and a total of 20,000 Afghan refugees over the “long-term”.In a letter to Mr Johnson, the SNP leader said: “We are concerned that the commitment to resettle 20,000 refugees in ‘the long-term’ and just 5,000 in the first year is not sufficient in the context of the humanitarian crisis that is unfolding.”Ms Sturgeon added: “We believe a commitment to a substantial increase in numbers is required and urgently seek further details of how civilians, especially women, girls and others in need of refuge will be protected.”She said Nato countries should avoid a “cut-and-run operation” in Afghanistan as thousands seek to get on flights out of Kabul’s airport – but the US made clear on Tuesday that the evacuation will end by 31 August.The SNP has called for parliament to be “recalled immediately” for an update on the UK’s evacuation and resettlement plans – saying the failure to persuade the US to push back its deadline was “deeply regrettable”.The party’s Westminster leader Ian Blackford MP said: “The UK parliament must be recalled immediately so that ministers can provide daily updates and MPs can properly scrutinise plans for the evacuation, refugee resettlement, and efforts to tackle humanitarian and security concerns.”Mr Blackford added: “It would be unacceptable for the prime minister to avoid scrutiny by keeping parliament in recess for another fortnight.”Refugee charities have said the UK’s short-term commitment to resettle 5,000 Afghan citizens was “too little” to meet the scale of the immediate crisis. Both Conservative and Labour MPs have also urged ministers to use the programme for people trying to flee the country “right now”.Labour’s Yvette Cooper, chair of the Home Affairs Committee, and the Conservtaive Tobias Ellwood, chair of the Defence Committee, said it should be implemented on “an interim basis”.Organisations involved in refugee resettlement say there is “confusion” in the way the scheme has been presented, because the process typically takes place only once people have fled their country of origin.The Independent has backed calls from MPs and charities for No 10 to expand its plan to resettle Afghans at risk of losing their lives in the Taliban takeover.Our Refugees Welcome campaign is calling for the government to offer sanctuary to as many Afghans as possible – and for local authorities and charities devoted to their welfare to be given the strongest possible support. More

Hard-left figure Sharon Graham is set to win a surprise victory and become the next general secretary of Unite, the union which remains the Labour Party’s biggest funder.Ms Graham – backed by the Socialist Workers Party and the Socialist Party – is on course to take the contest, union sources have said.Her team is now “confident” of winning the election over Steve Turner, the candidate favoured by outgoing leader Len McCluskey, and Gerard Coyne – the candidate sympathetic to Sir Keir Starmer’s leadership.Momentum, the grassroots group set up after Jeremy Corbyn became Labour leader to support his policies, said it welcomed Ms Graham’s “victory” in the contest.“Unite members have made their voices heard,” said co-chair Gaya Sriskanthan. “They want a union that organises, that builds power in the workplace, and that uses its leverage to take on bad bosses.” Ms Sriskanthan added: “Sharon campaigned on that promise and we fundamentally agree that any route to progressive change in Britain requires working class organisation to be stronger than ever before. We look forward to working with Unite and our allies across the Labour movement to achieve that goal.”Although the official results do not come until Thursday, Ms Graham’s team said they were confident on winning based on preliminary results from about 10 per cent of ballot papers opened for sampling purposes.A spokesman for her campaign said: “The more it goes on the better it looks for us. Of course, we will only get the result when the count is finished tomorrow. But we are confident Sharon is going to win it.”One union source told HuffPost UK that the piles of ballot papers for Ms Graham were clearly larger than for Mr Turner and Mr Coyne. “She’s on course to win, no question,” they said.Mr Turner had been viewed as the clear favourite for the leadership after he won Mr McCluskey’s endorsement earlier in the summer when the key Corbyn ally announced he was stepping down.But Ms Graham – who would be the first woman to lead Unite if she emerges victorious – won credit from members by refusing to heed Mr Turner’s call to quit the race in case she split the vote on the left.Despite Ms Graham’s left-wing credentials and support from the Socialist Workers Party, she has made clear she does not want to engage in constant bickering with Sir Keir and the Labour leadership team.She said last month: “Labour will likely be in opposition for most of the next decade and workers can’t afford to wait…we can be more effective by ridding ourselves of the obsession with fighting yesterday’s wars within Labour.”But she also suggested Labour could not be certain of the union’s financial support, saying she favours “payment by results” and warning there there would be “no blank cheque” under her leadership.Mr Coyne, Sir Keir’s favoured candidate, told The Independent earlier this month that he would maintain Labour’s funding and wouldn’t “purge” his opponents in the way that Mr McCluskey purged him. More

Boris Johnson’s government will continue to hold migrants at a former army barracks in Kent in defiance of a court ruling which deemed the facility “unsafe” and “squalid”.The Home Office has decided to carry on using the Napier Barracks for asylum seekers despite a High Court judge deciding that the facility failed to meet the “minimum standard” for accommodation, it has emerged.Campaigners had hoped the government would only use the site on a temporary basis during the pandemic – after the Home Office agreed with the Ministry of Defence it would be used until September 2021.But groups working with migrants at the Napier Barracks facility told The Independent that they have been informed that the facility will be used as migrant accommodation beyond September.Ministers are set to agree a deal which would see the former army barracks used to house migrants for another four years, until at 2025, according to The Sun.A Whitehall source told the newspaper: “We don’t want people staying in hotels when we’ve got perfectly good military barracks to house arrivals. They were good enough for our brave boys, and they’re good enough for them.”Campaign groups reacted with alarm at the prospect of migrants being held at the facility for years to come after June’s High Court ruling.Justice Linden ruled in the men’s favour, finding that the accommodation failed to meet a “minimum standard” and that the Home Office acted unlawfully when deciding that the former military camp was appropriate.Bella Sankey, director of Detention Action, told The Independent: “The Home Office’s plans to continue to use Napier Barracks are outrageous. It is completely inappropriate to accommodate those fleeing persecution in this way – the barracks have been described as unsafe by both the NHS and the courts, and have already seen large Covid outbreaks.”Satbir Singh, Joint Council Welfare of Immigrants, added: “In the face of recent events, it’s particularly odious that government will house vulnerable people – likely many Afghan refugees – at Napier for another four years.”He added: “This is a camp that the High Court deemed overcrowded, unsafe and ‘unfit for human habitation’ earlier this year. No-one should be housed there right now, let alone in four years’ time.”“Those seeking asylum should be supported in appropriate housing in the community, not held in crowded rooms in what amounts to quasi-detention. The Home Office needs to rethink its approach to asylum as a matter of urgency.”There are around 230 people living in the barracks, and campaigners have expressed concerns that vulnerable residents are subjected to conditions that execrate mental health problems and are not given adequate access to legal advice.Home secretary Priti Patel has faced calls to resign by opposition MPs for “misleading parliament” after she claimed her department had followed public health advice when housing asylum seekers at Napier Barracks.In June letters to the home affairs select committee from Public Health England (PHE) revealed they had previously advised the Home Office against dormitory-style accommodation at the site.The Home Office said “significant improvements” have been made to Napier Barracks since the June court ruling – but have not said how much has been spent on changes to accommodation.Maddie Harris, founder of the Humans for Rights Network – whose group has been in regular contact with migrants inside Napier Barracks – denied the idea that any positive changes had been made.“They government is not making significant improvements to the dormitories,” she said. “It’s a woefully inadequate place to be accommodated – the place needs to be closed immediately. Migrants should be given safe, secure, self-contained accommodation.”The Independent has contacted the Home Office for comment. More

NHS leaders and experts have warned that the health service is facing a “mass exodus” of staff in the year ahead unless exhausted doctors and nurses struggle are given more support.It comes as the latest figures show that mental health absences among NHS staff have soared during the spring and early summer – as a growing number suffer from burnout.There were 13,000 NHS staff off work because of mental health issues in May – a 55 per cent increase on the previous year, according to FirstCare, which monitors absences in the health service. There were another 13,000 absences mental health absences in June – up 42 per cent on last year.“From April onwards we’ve seen a significant rise in mental health cases, and it shows no sign of stopping,” Steve Carter, director of consulting services at FirstCare, told a panel of MPs and peers on Tuesday. “We need to address the mental health issue quickly if we are to get through the winter.”Professor Stephanie Snow – co-author of the NHS Voices of Covid-19 project, which asks staff how they are coping during the pandemic – said many were struggling under the strain of ongoing Covid cases and the backlog of treatments for other illnesses.Prof Snow told MPs and peers on the All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on Coronavirus that many doctors and nurses are worried about their colleagues quitting in the months ahead.“They’re worried about losing more colleagues,” she said. “There is a real sense of fear about a mass exodus of health professionals leaving because of their own ill health – many say they simply can’t face working in the health service anymore.”Prof Snow said staff were under huge pressure to help get the health service back to normal, while dealing with the “trauma” they experienced the Covid and underlying problems with workforce shortages.“We’re seeing high levels of burnout, high levels of stress, and it’s starting to manifest into physical symptoms,” said Dr Rachel Sumner, co-author of the Covid-19 Heroes study on the impact of the pandemic on frontline workers.Dr Sumner added: “Many [NHS staff] are considering leaving – and that would be a true tragedy. Most of them won’t leave during the pandemic because they feel it’s their duty. But this is only going to get worse unless there’s significant work done to sort out the problems. If we don’t look after them, disaster will come.”A survey of Royal College of Nursing members last month revealed that 36 per cent were thinking of leaving the profession – up from 27 per cent last year.Factors cited include the way nursing staff have been treated during the Covid pandemic (44 per cent), low staffing levels (43 per cent), and lack of management support (42 per cent).A British Medical Association survey in May found just over a fifth (21 per cent) of doctors working in the health service said they might leave within the next year.Dr Katherine Henderson, president of the Royal College of Emergency Medicine, told MPs and peers she was worried the most experienced staff in the NHS will leave “sooner than they should” because of current pressures and lack of support.“Older staff are going to bail out and retire early unless the things they’ve been banging on about are actually addressed. There needs to be a serious look at retention … I’m genuinely not confident there is a plan.”Rising patient numbers are placing further strain on the NHS, with major hospitals issuing a “black alert” – an emergency warning they are under sever pressure – over bed shortages in recent weeks.Two major London hospitals told The Independent earlier this month that they had declared “black alert” incidents due to bed shortages, as well as rising numbers of people turning up in A&E.Hospitals across England have seen record levels of non-Covid patients turning up at A&E, with a lack of intensive care beds meaning routine surgeries, including for some cancer patients, have been cancelled across England. More

The Scottish government has announced it will launch a public inquiry into the handling of the Covid-19 pandemic by the end of this year – months ahead of Boris Johnson’s promise of an inquiry in the spring of 2022.The announcement came after the deputy first minister John Swinney met representatives of the Scottish branch of the campaign group Covid-19 Bereaved Families for Justice.A lawyer for the families said the decision put pressure on the prime minister to bring forward his promised four-nations probe, warning that Mr Johnson’s proposed timing was “far too late” and might mean sessions not starting in earnest until 2023 or later.Publishing aims and principles for the inquiry, the Scottish government said that it will be independent and will look into events causing public concern north of the border, including the spread of coronavirus into care homes.First minister Nicola Sturgeon said it will be led by a judge and will take a “person-centred, human rights-based approach”The Scottish government will “liaise closely” with Westminster and other devolved administrations to avoid “duplication and overlap”, she said.But she added: “The need for co-operation with other governments is not in my view a reason to delay the establishment of our own inquiry.”Welcoming the announcement, solicitor Aamer Anwar said Mr Johnson no longer had any excuse for holding back the UK-wide investigation.“He’s talking about an inquiry in spring 2022, and having been involved in public inquiries what that in reality means is that we could quite easily be looking at a UK inquiry starting around about 2023 and more than likely knocked off track as a result of that,” Mr Anwar told a Glasgow press conference.“It appears to the families that delay after delay by Boris Johnson is no longer acceptable, which is why the families demanded that the Scottish government acted differently.“The pressure is now on the UK government to deliver. Families are demanding in England and Wales, and Northern Ireland that Boris Johnson must deliver. There’s no reason for any further delay.”Restricted to matters devolved to Scotland, the inquiry will aim to establish the facts behind the pandemic and the explanations for decisions taken by authorities, as well as the reasons why the handling of the outbreak “may not have gone as expected”, and to consider how different outcomes could have been achieved and what lessons should be learnt.Health secretary Jeane Freeman has previously admitted that moving elderly patients from hospitals to care homes early in the pandemic without taking the right precautions was a “mistake”.Ms Sturgeon said in April that she wanted a judge-led inquiry to begin before the end of this year, and would prefer it to be established on a UK-wide basis.But she came under pressure to go it alone after Mr Johnson said the four-nations probe will not start until the springScotland has suffered 8,070 of the UK’s recorded 132,000 deaths from Covid-19 and has seen a sharp spike in infections over the past week. Ms Sturgeon today confirmed 10 coronavirus-linked deaths and 4,323 cases have been recorded north of the border in the past 24 hours.Setting up an inquiry was one of the first minister’s pledges for her first 100 days of the reformed Scottish government following the election on 6 May.Announcing a consultation, to conclude by 30 September, on the format and terms of reference for the probe, Mr Swinney said: “Since the early stages of our pandemic response we have been committed to a public inquiry into the handling of the pandemic in Scotland, to ensure that lessons are learned for the future.“The publication of this aims and principles paper, as one of our 100-days commitments, is an important step towards the establishment of that inquiry.“We will continue to listen to those affected by Covid-19, including bereaved families, on what they wish the public inquiry to focus on.“Their feedback will be fundamental in reviewing the suggested approach set out here, and setting the terms of reference for an independent Scottish inquiry.“Discussions are also ongoing with the UK government on the planned four-nations inquiry, to ensure all areas that need to be considered are covered in a way that gives confidence to bereaved families and others.” More

The government is said to be considering plans to make it a criminal offence for UK residents to travel to Afghanistan, which, if defied, could see offenders jailed for up to 10 years.It was not immediately clear if all or just some of the south-central Asian nation would be blacklisted under the proposal, according to reports first published in The Telegraph. Ministers are due to discuss how it could legitimately work later this week.“We’re looking at every option available at this stage about how we proceed in the future. This is one of the options”, the newspaper quoted a source as saying. However, the source stressed ministers were currently preoccupied with the evacuation effort to get UK nationals and eligible Afghans out of the country as fast as possible.The drastic measure is thought to be a result of the longer-term threats presented by the Taliban takeover, particularly mounting fears that an influx of radicalised western recruits could travel to Afghanistan to join existing or incoming terror cells in the country.Reports over the past few weeks have raised concerns that Al Qaeda and the so-called Islamic State Khorasan – also known as Isis-K – could gain momentum in the fragile country now it is in the hands of the Taliban, an Islamist militant group. In 2019, the government created new “designated area offence” powers which allow the home secretary to ban British nationals from travelling to, or remaining in, specified terror hotspots.The legislation – part of the Counter-Terrorism and Border Security Act 2019 – was introduced in the wake of the collapse of the Isis caliphate, which saw suspected British jihadists and jihadi brides return to the UK from Syria and Iraq.Certain loopholes exist, though, for people who can prove they have a legitimate reason to be in a blacklisted area, such as humanitarian work and journalism.One foreign policy think tank told The Telegraph on Monday night that it welcomed the idea of Britain including Afghanistan on its blacklist.Sam Armstrong, the director of communications at the Henry Jackson Society, warned the government has been left “completely unprepared for the Taliban’s victory” in a range of areas, including asylum and counter-terrorism. “With glaring loopholes in counter-terrorism laws and clear support for the Taliban from UK extremists, banning travel to the region has become vitally important for national security,” he said.In former US president Donald Trump’s 2020 deal, which ensured the withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan, the Taliban pledged to ensure terrorist groups including al-Qaeda and Isis were not able to use Afghan territory to train and plot foreign attacks.But, as The Independent revealed last week, there are already concerns that the agreement may not be honoured, or that the Taliban may lose control of parts of the country to its rivals.A widely-circulated UN Security Council report, dated 1 June this year, came to the conclusion that the militant group and al-Qaeda “remain closely aligned and show no indication of breaking ties”. Elsewhere in the document, which covers developments in Afghanistan between May 2020 and April 2021, UN member states are quoted as saying that the relationship between the two groups has “grown deeper as a consequence of personal bonds of marriage and shared partnership in struggle, now cemented through second generational ties”. The Taliban previously refuted these claims.A spokesperson said Downing Street had nothing to add when approached for comment. More

Ben Wallace has insisted he will “prioritise people over pets” in the Afghanistan evacuation amid a row with a former Royal Marine turned animal welfare charity boss who claims to have been “abandoned” in the country.The defence secretary also accused Paul Farthing — known as “Pen” — of talking “bollocks” after he suggested he had been left by the Ministry of Defence (MoD) to fend for himself in Kabul.Mr Farthing founded the Nowzad animal shelter in Kabul rescuing dogs, cats and donkeys after serving with the British Army in Afghanistan in the mid-2000s.Since the Taliban seized the country last week, he has been campaigning to have all his staff and their families, alongside 140 dogs and 60 cats, evacuated from the country in a plan he has dubbed “Operation Ark”.Mr Farthing said he had fundraised enough money to charter a private aircraft into Kabul International Airport with capacity for 250 passengers, but was still awaiting crucial documents from the MoD.But in an update on Monday evening, the veteran claimed he had been “left to fend for myself” in Kabul and had been “cut off” from the MoD by the defence secretary’s special adviser.“22 year marine left behind lines,” he added. “Neither my staff or animals will get out now — cheers Boris Johnson”.In response the defence secretary, however, told LBC radio “that’s bollocks”, insisting Mr Farthing was contacted on Friday to come forward for processing and urged him to “take advantage of the route out”.In a separate interview on Sky News, Mr Wallace said the animal welfare charity boss had done an “amazing” job in the Afghan capital, Kabul.He claimed that “no one” was blocking the charter flight, instead arguing: “If that aircraft flew in today it would probably sit, it would block the airfield, it would sit there empty because it’s about getting the flow [of people] through the gate, through the barriers and into the airport and onto the aircraft”.Mr Wallace insisted that a charter flight was no “magic wand”, saying: “The magic wand is whether people can get through Kabul through the Taliban checkpoints and then through the 3,000—plus people, some of whom are waiting in front of the queue because they are under real threat, direct threat from the Taliban right now.”He said: “I’m not prepared to prioritise pets over people. I want people to come through that flow.” More