BORIS Johnson has denied overruling his Defence Secretary to ensure 200 dogs and cats are given a spot on emergency flights out of Afghanistan.
The Prime Minister insists he did not have any "influence" on a bid by a former royal marine to secure the passage of the pets along with his animal shelter staff.
Paul Farthing, known as Pen, founded the Nowzad shelter in Kabul after serving with the British Army in Afghanistan in the mid-2000s, with the organisation rescuing dogs, cats and donkeys.
Since the collapse of the Afghan government, he has campaigned to have his staff and their families as well as 140 dogs and 60 cats evacuated from the country in a plan he has dubbed Operation Ark.
Reports have suggested the Prime Minister's wife Carrie stepped in to push for his rescue.
Asked about the reports on Thursday, Johnson said: "I've had absolutely no influence on any particular case, nor would that be right.
"That's not, that's not how we do things in this country."
Dear Sir; my team & my animals are stuck at airport circle. We have a flight waiting. Can you please facilitate safe passage into the airport for our convoy? @suhailshaheen1 We are an NGO who will come back to Afghanistan but right now I want to get everyone out safely. 🙏🏼
— Pen Farthing (@PenFarthing) August 26, 2021
READ MORE:Â Home Office blames 'technical glitch' as Afghan calls sent to washing machine firm
Other reports have suggested Defence Secretary Ben Wallace complained that British military efforts to evacuate people from Kabul had been "diverted" because of the attempts to rescue the former marine.
Earlier, Farthing issued a plea on Twitter to ensure his "safe passage" into Kabul airport.
Addressing the Taliban spokesman Suhail Shaheen, Farthing said: "Dear Sir; my team & my animals are stuck at airport circle. We have a flight waiting. Can you please facilitate safe passage into the airport for our convoy?
"We are an NGO who will come back to Afghanistan but right now I want to get everyone out safely."
He added: "We have been here for 10 hours after being assured that we would have safe passage. Truly would like to go home now. Let's prove the IEA are taking a different path."
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