Boris Johnson directly approved the evacuation of cats and dogs with Pen Farthing’s animal charity from Afghanistan, according to a second government whistleblower.
Josie Stewart – a senior official at the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) – said it was “widespread knowledge” that the decision to help the Nowzad charity “came from the prime minister”.
Mr Johnson has denied direct involvement in the evacuation of animals. But Ms Stewart backed up claims made by whistleblower Raphael Marshall saying emails in her inbox referenced “the PM’s decision on Nowzad”.
Ms Stewart also accused Sir Philip Barton, the Foreign Office’s permanent undersecretary, and Nigel Casey, the PM’s special representative for Afghanistan, of having “intentionally lied” to MPs on the foreign affairs select committee.
The whistleblower said she “cannot fathom” why they would do so but that “they must have done so”, adding: “I have tried to imagine but cannot conceive of any way this could have been an honest mistake.”
The Foreign Office immediately rejected the whistleblower’s claims. “At all times officials have responded to the committee’s questions in good faith, on the basis of the evidence available to us at the time,” said a FCDO spokesperson.
The spokesperson also said the prime minister “has made clear he had no role in authorising individual evacuations from Afghanistan during Operation Pitting, including Nowzad staff and animals”.
But Labour’s shadow foreign secretary David Lammy said the revelations were “further confirmation that the prime minister put the lives of animals ahead of humans on a personal whim and then lied about doing so”.
The Labour frontbencher called the PM a “serial liar” and added: “He is unfit to be prime minister.”
Ms Stewart, who said she previously leaked information such was her concern about the handling of the Afghan crisis, said she accepted that speaking out would likely mean losing her job.
She said: “I feel a strong sense of moral injury for having been part of something so badly managed and so focused on managing reputational risk and political fallout rather than the actual crisis and associated human tragedy.”
Ms Stewart said the messages about the animal evacuation decision were coming from the PM on Microsoft Teams, and “heard it discussed in the crisis centre including by senior civil servants”.
She also said she was copied on numerous emails “which clearly suggested this” which no-one, including Mr Casey, challenged.
In January MPs on the foreign affairs select committee published an email from a senior official referring to “the PM’s decision” on Nowzad, copied to Mr Casey.
Sir Philip apologised for “inadvertently inaccurate answers”, stating that Mr Casey had been busy that day and did not remember the email.
The BBC later published further emails showing that Mr Casey wrote an email about asking “Number 10” for input on the case.
Ms Stewart told MPs: “Nigel Casey explicitly testified that he had searched his emails and found nothing of relevance, yet when I searched my emails for “PM” and “Nowzad” I found more than one email referencing “the PM’s decision on Nowzad” and with Nigel Casey in copy.”
The whistleblower added: “I cannot fathom why either Philip Barton or Nigel Casey would have intentionally lied to the Committee, but I believe that they must have done so both in the letter dated 17 January and in the oral testimony given on 25 January.
Ms Stewart said she did not believe there was any deliberate decision “to prioritise animals over people” but that “the decision to approve Nowzad’s Afghan staff under LOTR (leave outside the rules) was not in line with policy”.
The whistleblower said “there was no reason to believe these people should be prioritised under the agreed criteria”.
She said although letters from Sir Philip and Foreign Office minister Lord Ahmad were “factually accurate” when they said “Nowzad staff were included by officials in the potential cohorts to be considered for evacuation if space became available under LOTR”, she said this was “misleading”.
She told the committee: “From what I heard and saw, Nowzad staff were included as a late addition only in response to this ‘PM decision’. This occurred against the previous judgment of officials.”
Ms Stewart added: “I do not find it credible that Philip Barton, or those who drafted his letter dated January 17 2022, would not have been aware of this.”
In her written evidence, released on Monday, Ms Stewart also dismissed government claims that civil servants often portrayed decisions as coming from the PM if they did not.
Foreign Office minister Lord Goldsmith had claimed in the Lords that: “It’s not uncommon in Whitehall (...) for decisions to be interpreted or portrayed as coming directly from one department or another or even the prime minister, even when that isn’t the case.”
She said: “I have never in my career seen any such thing. Governance would fall apart entirely if this were the case.”
