Ministers risk creating “wild west” conditions in matters of national security by the increased use of personal email and phones to conduct confidential business, intelligence experts and former officials have warned.
After a week tainted by a row over the use of a personal email account by the home secretary, it was revealed on Sunday that Liz Truss’s mobile is alleged to have been hacked by overseas agents.
Ministers did not deny the report into the attack on Truss’s phone, the discovery of which took place over the summer during the Tory leadership contest she would go on to win.
Richard Dannatt, the former head of the British army, accused the pair of “ill discipline” and “poor judgment” on Sunday. “This, frankly, is not good enough,” he added. “If these people aspire to be in senior positions, positions of leadership, they’ve got to be disciplined.”
Suella Braverman’s position as home secretary – Rishi Sunak restored her to the job a week after Truss had sacked her over the data breach – is seen as particularly vulnerable, amid separate claims that she ignored legal advice about people being held too long in terrible conditions at the Manston asylum processing centre in Kent.
One cabinet minister said there was an increasing assumption that she would have to go soon: “I don’t think she’ll survive long. It isn’t just the leaks, it’s that she’s not making decisions.” Labour, meanwhile, said there was “a troubling pattern” to Braverman’s actions.
The home secretary was sacked by Truss for using a personal email to send a confidential government document on immigration policy to the Tory backbencer John Hayes, a mentor and close ideological ally.
It has since emerged that Truss allegedly used her personal phone while foreign secretary for numerous exchanges, including with officials from other nations, and for private chats with Kwasi Kwarteng, who was later her chancellor when she was in No 10.
Asked about claims in the Mail on Sunday that these chats could have been read by Russian agents, Michael Gove, also brought back to the cabinet by Sunak last week, did not deny this. The levelling up secretary said only that “very robust protocols” were in place within government.
There is, however, growing concern about the use of non-official communication methods by ministers and some political appointees, whether via personal phones and private emails, or through encrypted chat applications such as WhatsApp.
Worries about Truss’s phone being potentially compromised by a hostile state came at the end of July, amid the Tory leadership contest to replace Boris Johnson.
One insider identified the “particular anxiety” being WhatsApp, and the fear that several months of messages with senior government and international figures might have been read by a third party using malware, though investigations continue.
Panicked officials issued Truss with a new phone and number, but the old one was retained so as to avoid alarm, with messages to the old phone monitored.
It is thought to be unlikely that Truss would have used her personal phone for secret or top secret business but that even casual WhatsApp messages could be revelatory.
Peter Ricketts, a former national security adviser, said such inside gossip could be useful intelligence for a hostile state. “You can’t stop ministers talking to their mates. But they have to be conscious that talk and chat can give away sensitive info about the state of the government,” he said.
Lord Ricketts added the alarm over Truss’s mobile emphasised the need for ministers to act cautiously with their phones. “The security community cannot emphasise enough that you have to be really careful in what you text. You have to assume that others are listening in,” he said.
Dave Penman, the head of the FDA union, which represents senior civil servants, said there was something of a “wild west” culture within government over such issues, as also shown by Braverman’s use of a personal Gmail account.
“There is no interest in government to sort this out,” he said. “The whole thing around the use of private messaging and email is really badly regulated, and there’s not really any interest for ministers in setting up processes.
“Some departments are doing it better than others, and some are trying. But unless you’ve got the political will to clamp down on this stuff, it won’t happen. This is how they want to operate – they want to avoid scrutiny.”
Bob Kerslake, a former head of the UK civil service, said ministers were increasingly aware of the potential security risks of using private communication channels, which made actions such as Braverman’s all the more hard to understand.
“If this sort of thing happened with a civil servant there would be disciplinary action, no question about it,” Lord Kerslake said.
“If you resign but then come back within a week, what you essentially say is that it’s OK. That message gets through to other ministers, and potentially to civil servants as well. You need a high level of discipline on this now.”
Lord Dannatt told Times Radio: “Our leaders must be sufficiently disciplined to only communicate through authorised means which themselves are encrypted and are secure.
“We’ve seen it with Suella Braverman apparently sending messages that she shouldn’t have done on a personal email, and now we get it with Liz Truss.
“This, frankly, is not good enough. If these people aspire to be in senior positions, positions of leadership, they’ve got to be disciplined, they’ve got to follow the rules, or, frankly, we’ll put other people in their place.”
Dannatt added that the strict rules on communications were there for a reason.
“If you want to communicate government business, use an encrypted handheld device, use a secure telephone line, use a secure means of communication,” he said. “People in senior positions have got access to these secure means of communicating and they should use them, not doing so is ill discipline and, frankly, reflects very poorly on their judgment.”
While No 10 is expected to remind ministers and relevant MPs of security protocols, Labour is likely to keep up the pressure over Braverman, potentially seeking another Commons urgent question over her actions on Monday.
Yvette Cooper, the shadow home secretary, linked what she saw as Braverman’s failures over the use of the personal email, and with conditions at Manston.
“The home secretary is responsible for public safety and upholding the law as well as national security,” Cooper said. “There is a troubling pattern of Suella Braverman ignoring these basic responsibilities.”
One former senior Whitehall insider said they understood from government contacts that the security services had been unable to establish definitively what had happened in the case of Truss’s phone, though the concern among officials was real. “Government isn’t convinced the phone was hacked but won’t say this for security reasons,” they said.
A government spokesperson said: “We do not comment on individuals’ security arrangements. The government has robust systems in place to protect against cyber-threats. That includes regular security briefings for ministers, and advice on protecting their personal data and mitigating cyber-threats.”
