Ben Wallace has caused a stir today with an interview on the Today programme. The security minister confirmed that the government had not shared full intelligence on the Skripal poisoning with Jeremy Corbyn – insisting that the ‘circle’ of those with access to the highly sensitive information should be restricted to only a small number:
‘This is serious stuff and the circle of who gets to see very sensitive information is very small, because if you leak it or it gets out, people’s lives are put at risk.
The best example is Mr Skripal; that’s what happens to people if other countries to decide to take actions or they have enemies.’
Wallace’s comments appear to imply that the government do not trust the Labour leader with this information. Notably, while Corbyn has received an intelligence briefing on privy council terms, he has not been given the same access to highly classified information as David Cameron provided to Ed Miliband over Syria in 2013.
Labour have been quick to accuse the Tories of playing politics for suggesting that Corbyn could leak intelligence. What’s more, Corbyn’s supporters say it is unfair to criticise him for querying the evidence if he hasn’t been shown all the evidence. After all, could a man who is the favourite to take office at the next election really be too naive or untrustworthy to have access to privileged information? The problem is that too many in government think this is the case. Rather than pure party politics – and undoubtedly there is an aspect of this – on foreign policy the Conservatives view Corbyn as a much more dangerous figure than Miliband ever was.
Comments