THE inquiry into the leak of diplomatic cables criticising Donald Trump’s White House is focusing on whether “someone within the system” was responsible, a Foreign Office minister has said.
Sir Alan Duncan said there was no evidence the dispatches from Sir Kim Darroch – the UK’s ambassador to the US – had been obtained through computer hacking.
Instead, he said the investigation was looking at the possibility they had been “illicitly” released by someone with access to diplomatic reports.
READ MORE: Donald Trump hits out at 'very stupid' UK official in Twitter rant
Darroch announced this week he was standing down from his posting in Washington, saying his position had become “impossible” after a barrage of abuse from Trump.
Downing Street has said “initial discussions” have taken place with the police who could become formally involved in the leak inquiry if there was evidence of “criminal activity”.
In the Commons yesterday, Duncan told MPs: “We do not, at the moment, have any evidence that this was a hack so our focus is on finding someone within the system who has released illicitly these communications ... that is where the inquiry is primarily focused at the moment.”
There was continuing anger among many MPs at the role played by former foreign secretary Boris Johnson, whose repeated refusal to back Darroch in Tuesday’s Tory leadership television debate was widely seen to have contributed to his decision to quit.
The frontrunner to succeed Theresa May insisted it was nothing to do with him, saying he was “very surprised” at the construction which had been placed on events.
“I can’t believe they’re trying to blame me for this,” he told The Sun.
“It seems bizarre to me. I’m a great supporter of Kim’s. I worked very well with him for years. I think that he’s done a superb job.”
Duncan, who previously accused Johnson of having thrown Darroch “under a bus”, said he hoped the the “entire apparatus of government” would ensure the ambassador was looked after following his departure from Washington.
“Sir Kim Darroch’s career is not over. I hope the House will appreciate that although this is a difficult moment, it doesn’t mean that’s the end of his career,” he told MPs.
“I hope the Foreign Office and the entire apparatus of government will look after him, appreciate his merits and make sure he can be redeployed somewhere else for the benefit of our United Kingdom.”
READ MORE: Nicola Sturgeon challenges May successor over UK ambassador rant
Meanwhile, Downing Street has refused to be drawn on whether May intends to appoint a new ambassador before she leaves office in two weeks’ time.
If May were to make the appointment it would deny Johnson the chance to put his choice of envoy in place if he became PM. It would also give his leadership rival Jeremy Hunt a role in selecting the new ambassador. As Foreign Secretary, Hunt advises the prime minster on such appointments.
Allies of Johnson have insisted it must be for the next prime minister to decide who Britain’s new envoy to the US should be. One told The Times: “With two weeks to go before the new prime minister takes over it would seem odd if [the PM] plunged in and appointed someone. It’s such an important decision you would think it would be made by the new prime minister.”
Duncan hinted an early appointment may be unlikely. “We do really want to make sure we get the very best person and I think it’d be a pity if in the interests of alacrity we chose a number two rather than a number one,” he said. “So it’s not for me to make any further comment on that really. I don’t know whose names might be in the frame, but that’s a matter for the prime minister to decide.”
May’s spokesman said the appointment would be made “in due course”.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel