Markus Andrews

Hundreds of Ministry of Defence (MoD) data breaches have been revealed as questions intensify over its ability to keep sensitive information safe in the wake of the Afghan data breach.The latest MoD data shows there were 569 incidents in 2023-24 – up from 550 the previous year – which included electronic devices being lost and protected documents not being disposed of properly.In one incident last year, the details of 272,000 staff – including names and bank details – were breached when one of its systems, run by an external contractor, was hacked by a “malign actor”. In another case, the MoD was fined £350,000 by the Information Commissioner for a breach related to the handling of emails linked to the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (ARAP) – the scheme to bring Afghans with links to British forces to safety in UK.Lord Beamish, the chairman of the powerful Intelligence and Security Committee (ISC), has demanded the MoD explain why high-security information is being held on low-security systems.It follows the revelation this week of a catastrophic data breach, which exposed 100,000 Afghans to potential reprisals from the Taliban, costing the UK taxpayer billions and prompting a three-year cover-up through the use of an unprecedented superinjunction.Further concerns emerged on Thursday after it was revealed that British spies and special forces soldiers were also potentially exposed by the incident.John Healey (Lucy North/PA) More

Rachel Reeves’s plan to encourage savers to move their cash into investments has sparked a lively reader response, especially among older people who say they have neither the time nor appetite for risk.Many commenters questioned the wisdom of urging people into the stock market, arguing that fixed-rate savings accounts and tax-free ISAs already offer attractive returns of 4–5 per cent, with none of the potential losses. “Why would I want to invest in something that could lose money?” asked one 78-year-old pensioner, summing up a widely shared sentiment.Others pointed to personal experience with underperforming stocks and shares ISAs, and noted that at a later stage in life, there simply isn’t time to recover from a market downturn. Still, a few acknowledged that younger savers with time and discipline could benefit from regular investing, provided they get the right guidance.Here’s what you had to say:It was not worth the anxietyInvestment products are not for everyone, especially people who cannot afford top-end financial advice, which costs too. I once had an investment-only mortgage, which kept me awake for years, every time the markets underperformed. In the end, we cashed it when the markets were doing quite well and paid off the mortgage 8 years earlier. To be honest, it was not worth the anxiety and sleepless nights over 17 years. So, carefully consider what type of risk resilience you have and how you would cope if your investments underperform, or if you lose it all, or a considerable chunk of your money. For me personally, never ever again. I feel safer with my Cash ISAs and, for the moment, sleep a lot better!CecinhaWould you move your savings into investments for the chance of bigger returns, or are you sticking with the safety of cash? Let us know in the comments below.I wouldn’t take the riskEach to their own, but if I have a decent amount of cash to invest, then I always fix it with a non-UK high street bank that’s based in the UK and protects funds up to £85k, and do my homework on them first, also checking for decent UK-based customer service.High street banks offer poor interest rate returns because they need to allegedly “cover their costs”, despite most banks now having closed down. But there are plenty of other banks out there that can give you a decent rate.For me personally, if it’s a decent wedge of money, then I wouldn’t take the risk in investing in stocks and shares.But that’s just me. If you’re rich and can afford to take the risk and the loss, then go for it.AmyThe risk factorI’ve a mate who’s far more well off than me, but she doesn’t have a scooby about all this stuff so she’s got £300k just sitting in her bank. It’s only in the last couple of years that she bothered getting an ISA and sorting out a higher-rate account, but when I said maybe she should invest or something, she simply wasn’t fussed. She said she doesn’t like the risk factor and is happy to just get a wee bit of interest and have it all to hand if she needs it.If people really aren’t interested in investing, particularly due to risk, I don’t really see what you can do to persuade them. I feel like this is another duff idea from the increasingly hapless Reeves.Elsie DOptimisticAssuming a 9 per cent return is pretty optimistic.I was advised years ago never to make long-term plans based on more than a 5% return – that would double your money in just under 15 years and quadruple it in 33 years – and to treat anything higher as an unexpected bonus. That advice has served me well for over 40 years.YorkshiremanRemember the caveatRemember the caveat: “Your capital is at risk and you may not get back the amount you invested.” Remember the ads asking if you’d lost money in a stocks and shares ISA? I know people who lost or didn’t make anything on their portfolio. Don’t forget Labour will want to tax any gains.samuel smithPeople don’t understand their own risk toleranceMost people don’t understand their own risk tolerance and should not put money into any assets that they are not comfortable with seeing a 30–50 per cent drawdown on. That’s why Reeves, who is not a financial adviser, is giving bad advice.PeakyBooThere are far more attractive places to investThe problem for Reeves is that there are far more attractive places to invest. For me, in the last 10 years, NASDAQ has been the only place to be. Some UK stocks have become attractive in recent years because of cheap valuations—cheap valuations because of a lack of confidence and the flight of deep pools of money from the UK, mainly due to Brexit and the mismanagement of baboons running the economy into the dust.I hope Reeves succeeds – there is no alternative politically.NotRedorBlueMy stocks and shares ISA has grownAfter a year, my stocks and shares ISA has grown by the princely sum of 1.28%. Stocks can dive very quickly and take ages to bounce back.samuel smithRelaxing regulationsRachel Reeves is relaxing regulations which were introduced after 2008 to prevent another financial crash. For that reason, I would be very cautious about investing.STIDWDon’t buy a car… investA lot of people, when they retire, use their lump sum to buy a car or a camper van. That is serious money just thrown away on a fast-depreciating asset. Just buy an old banger and invest the money in the stock market.Pomerol95Why would I want to invest in something that could lose money?I am 78 years old with an adequate pension and no mortgage.My savings are about 50 per cent kept in fixed-term ISAs earning around 4–5 per cent tax-free.I have an emergency fund in instant access. The remaining savings earn 4.55 per cent or more.Why would I want to invest in something that could lose money?Tony CaveIf you are in your “later years” you don’t have time to wait for falling stocks and shares to rise again. I have one stocks and shares ISA and, averaged out over 15 years, it’s not done any better than a cash ISA.HeatherRisk profilesIf you get yourself a reputable financial adviser (check their qualifications), they will do a risk assessment for you and agree on your risk profile before deciding where to invest.We have a relatively modest amount invested with a single ‘platform’ and used to be medium risk, but as we are getting on now, we’ve gone medium/low—less time to recover from any nasty, unexpected events that cause sudden drops in value (e.g. Covid, Russia invading Ukraine).WokeUpThe key word is ‘could’And the key word is could. Investments could increase in value, but they could also decrease – unless the government is underwriting losses.rEUjoinIs the public expected to fill the investment gap?Does this mean that major investment in the British economy is so low that the government is resorting to exhorting the people of this country to fill the void – hmmm.ClaudiaMaking the leapIf they haven’t put the money into a better savings account, then I’d doubt they’d make the leap. It would be convenient if the interest rate had to be at least adequate—that was the law.TheRedSquirrelTwenty years is a long time in investmentTwenty years is a long time in investment. During this period, companies can go bankrupt, geopolitical turmoil and wars can affect investments, and services and products can become obsolete due to disruptive technologies, and so on.OpinatorSome of the comments have been edited for this article for brevity and clarity.Want to share your views? Simply register your details below. Once registered, you can comment on the day’s top stories for a chance to be featured. Alternatively, click ‘log in’ or ‘register’ in the top right corner to sign in or sign up.Make sure you adhere to our community guidelines, which can be found here. For a full guide on how to comment click here. More

Sir Grant Shapps has said he was “surprised” the superinjunction to keep the huge Afghan data breach secret was in place for “so long” – despite fighting to keep the gagging order in place.The former defence secretary defended the government’s decision to hide the catastrophic leak, which resulted in 16,000 affected Afghans being evacuated to Britain, with some 8,000 still to come from the public, arguing the decision saved lives.Breaking his silence days after the data breach was revealed to the public, the former defence secretary told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that “I’d thought that it was probably going to come to an end last summer, the autumn perhaps at maximum”. But, The Independent can reveal that despite the judge in the case agreeing to lift the order last May, the Ministry of Defence (MoD) – which Sir Grant was responsible for at the time – insisted it needed to remain indefinitely.Sir Grant Shapps doubled down on the government’s decision More

The government’s decision to lower the voting age to 16 is being hailed as a landmark reform – but is it a step forward for democracy, or a political gamble?The change, due to take effect before the next general election, will bring UK-wide rules into line with Scotland and Wales and allow around 1.5 million more young people to have their say at the ballot box.Ministers say the move is about fairness, pointing out that 16-year-olds can already work, pay tax and join the armed forces. Labour has championed the policy as part of a wider drive to boost engagement in politics and rebuild trust in democratic institutions.Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner said the change would “break down barriers to participation” and help restore faith in institutions, while allowing more people to “engage in UK democracy”.Critics, however, accuse Keir Starmer of trying to tilt the electoral map in his favour. Nigel Farage described the reform as “an attempt to rig the political system”, while former minister Sir Simon Clarke called it “shameless gerrymandering”. Meanwhile, a recent poll found that nearly half of 16 and 17-year-olds don’t actually think they should have the vote.No 10 “absolutely rejected” claims that the reform was being brought in to shore up the government’s vote, and pollsters More in Common, said the expansion “will have little impact on election results – outside of hyper marginal seats”.So, is this a bold move to empower a new generation, or is 16 simply too young to properly engage in politics?Vote in our poll and let us know what you think in the comments below. More

The UK government has announced that the voting age will be lowered to 16 at the next election as part of a wider effort to restore trust in and “future-proof” democracy.Votes at 16 has grown from a niche concern to become a salient – if contentious – issue supported by most UK political parties and electoral reform groups. The Conservative Party remains a holdout, but has never acknowledged the contradiction of its continued opposition to the universal lowering of the voting age while empowering the Scottish and Welsh parliaments to enact the measure during its time in government.This is a policy response to concerns about declining youth democratic engagement since the late 1990s. Since 1997, the UK general election turnout rate for those aged 65 years and over has consistently been at least 20 percentage points higher than for those aged 18-24.The voting age for Scottish and Welsh elections is already 16 More

German chancellor Friedrich Merz has said he “deplores” Brexit as he signed a major cooperation deal between his country and Britain. At a press conference on Thursday alongside Sir Keir Starmer, Mr Merz said that countries should respond to the major challenges of our time “together”. Speaking through a translator, Mr Merz, on his first official visit to the UK since he became chancellor in May, told the press conference that he “deplores deeply” the UK’s decision to leave the EU.The UK-German treaty, the biggest between the two countries since the end of the Second World War, sees them both agree to collaborate on migration, trade and security. Friedrich Merz and Keir Starmer in No 10 on Thursday More