Foreign Office boss admits error over Afghan animal evacuation

Pen Farthing ran the charity Nowzad in Afghanistan before the Taliban took back Kabul

The Foreign Office's top civil servant has apologised for giving inaccurate answers to MPs about evacuating animals during the fall of Kabul.

Sir Philip Barton said he had "inadvertently" misled a committee investigating UK policy in Afghanistan.

Emails leaked to the committee show Foreign Office staff suggesting Boris Johnson had authorised the evacuation of animals and charity staff.

Sir Philip admitted he had given MPs incorrect information on this.

The prime minister denies any involvement in the decision to evacuate animals looked after by the charity Nowzad - run by ex-Royal Marine pen Farthing - from Kabul last August.

• PM authorised Afghan animal evacuation, leak suggests

• PM denies authorising animal evacuation from Kabul

About 15,000 people were airlifted out of the Afghan capital, as the Taliban took control following the withdrawal of Western forces.

Mr Farthing and 150 animals left Kabul Airport on a chartered plane paid for by donations.

The UK government sponsored clearance for the flight, leading to a row over whether the animals had been prioritised over people.

There have been reports for several weeks that the prime minister intervened on behalf of Mr Farthing's charity.

But when Sir Philip, the Foreign Office's permanent secretary, appeared before the Commons foreign affairs committee in December, he was asked whether there had been a "direction [given] from the prime minister" to Mr Farthing, via a letter written by Mr Johnson's then parliamentary private secretary, Trudy Harrison.

In it, she wrote that "you, your staff and their dependants are permitted to travel to Hamid Karsai International Airport".

"I am not aware of the letter you are talking about," Sir Philip replied.

'Speculation'

After this hearing, the committee conducted further questioning in written exchanges with Sir Philip, which it published on Wednesday.

Asked whether the prime minister's special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan, Nigel Casey, had received "any correspondence referring to the prime minister's intervention in the Nowzad case", he replied: "No."

Sir Philip was also asked whether he had any reason "to believe that there was support for this decision in No 10 or from the prime minister" or to believe that Foreign Office staff had "attributed this decision to the prime minister".

"I am not aware of that, beyond speculation in the public domain," he replied.

And, when he appeared before the committee on Tuesday, Mr Casey was asked if he knew whether the PM had intervened "in the evacuation of Nowzad staff or animals".

He replied: "Not to my knowledge."

Mr Casey said that he had "checked all my emails on the subject and I couldn't find any which referred to any prime ministerial intervention on the subject of Nowzad".

But further questions over Sir Philip and Mr Casey's remarks were raised by leaked emails published by the committee and by the BBC on Thursday.

One, sent by an unnamed Foreign Office official last August, said that the "PM has just authorised [Nowzad's] staff and animals to be evacuated".

Another email from an unnamed official, sent on the same day, referred to "the PM's decision earlier today to evacuate the staff of the Nowzad animal charity".

And BBC Newsnight's Sima Kotecha has seen two emails with the subject heading "Pen Farthing and dogs", showing the Foreign Office and Mr Casey sought guidance from No 10 over the issue.

Following these revelations, Sir Philip sent a letter to the committee, saying: "I am writing to apologise for the inadvertently inaccurate answers given to [the written] questions."

But he added: "As Nigel said to the committee on [Tuesday] he has no recollection of having seen emails in which staff attributed this decision to the prime minister. Nor do I."

Downing Street has continued to deny that Mr Johnson had any involvement with the Nowzad evacuation.

'Frenetic time'

The prime minister's official spokesman said: "It's not uncommon in Whitehall for a decision to be interpreted or portrayed as coming directly from the prime minister, even when that's not the case, and it's our understanding that's what happened in this instance.

"We appreciate it was a frenetic time for those officials dealing with this situation."

But Labour MP Chris Bryant, who sits on the Foreign Affairs Select Committee, told BBC Breakfast: "We're not being led. It's just chaos... All I want to know is who made the decision?"

Speaking to Channel 4 News, Mr Farthing said he didn't believe the prime minister had intervened to help evacuate his animals out of Afghanistan.

"If Boris Johnson intervenes, why did I almost not make it out of Kabul," he said.

"The British military did not help me get those dogs and cats onto that flight. They had left. They had gone, no British troops whatsoever facilitated my entry into Kabul airport.

He added that he had "never ever had any direct contact with the prime minister or with his wife".