A top Conservative politician has claimed internal documents prove “beyond doubt” the former head of the Royal Air Force “lied” to the then defence secretary over a recruitment scandal involving the discrimination of white men.
Alicia Kearns also accused the RAF and the Ministry of Defence of failing to compensate the former head of recruitment, Group Captain Lizzy Nicholl, who resigned in August 2022 in protest at what she correctly deemed to be an unlawful order to favour female and ethnic minority applicants over white men.
Ms Kearns, who is Group Captain Nicholl’s local MP, made the allegations during Prime Minister’s Questions on Wednesday.
Sir Keir Starmer said his government would “look into” the case and said a minister would meet with Ms Kearns.
The actions of the former head of RAF recruitment, who lost her career after refusing to follow the controversial order by her chain of command to prioritise women and ethnic minorities, prompted a major inquiry that concluded the RAF did unlawfully discriminate against white men in a recruitment drive aimed at boosting diversity.
“Group Captain Lizzy Nicholl had an exemplary career with the RAF until she was forced to resign for refusing to implement illegal recruitment orders,” Ms Kearns told parliament.
“Despite inquiry after inquiry vindicating Lizzy on every account, the RAF and MoD have failed to offer her far compensation and those responsible have walked away.
“I have documents proving beyond doubt that the former chief of the air staff lied to the then defence secretary about her case.”
Advertisement
The documents the MP referred to are understood to comprise the result of an initial review of RAF recruiting policy and practice, dated 5 September 2022, and the conclusion of an RAF board meeting two days later, attended by senior officials including, Air Chief Marshall Sir Mike Wigston, the then head of the RAF, and Ben Wallace, then defence secretary.
Image: Sir Mike Wigston was a champion of improving diversity
Both documents have been seen by Sky News.
A summary of the conclusion of the initial report into RAF recruiting policy and practice stated: “The recruitment policies of the RAF over the past two years generate a very high risk of successful legal challenge.
“The policies viewed individually and collectively, albeit framed with the laudable aim of increasing diversity, are highly likely to be regarded as going beyond lawful ‘positive action’ and constituting unlawful ‘positive discrimination’.”
The second document set out the conclusions of the Air Force Main Board meeting at the Ministry of Defence on 7 September, which included a discussion of the recruitment scandal.
It said: “CAS (Chief of Air Staff) had asked the Chief of Defence People (CDP) to conduct a swift review of the RAF’s recruiting practices; the review concluded that no evidence of actual discrimination had been found, however direction had been issued, which if acted upon would have left the RAF exposed to a high risk of successful legal challenge.”
Asked about the claims by Ms Kearns that Air Chief Marshal Wigston had lied about the case, an RAF source said: “I do not believe he would lie to a politician or to anyone. It was all based on the best available information – which changed.”
In her damning public intervention, Ms Kearns also revealed that other internal inquiries have similarly vindicated Group Captain Nicholl but she said that her constituent has yet to be fairly compensated, while those in charge at the time “have walked away”.
She did not identify anyone by name, but Air Chief Marshal Wigston was chief of the air staff at the time and a champion of improving diversity – something that the government also supported.
Air Vice-Marshal Maria Byford was head of personnel, while Air Commodore Jo Lincoln was another senior personnel officer.
In addition, Ms Kearns claimed that in the run-up to this summer’s election, officials used a period known as purdah – where there is less ministerial oversight because everyone is campaigning – to offer Group Captain “a derisory £2,000”.
In a challenge to Sir Keir, Ms Kearns said: “The prime minister says he believes in righting wrongs, so will he meet with Lizzy and help ensure that those responsible do not just walk away and Lizzy gets the justice she so very much deserves?”
Sky News has approached the Ministry of Defence and the RAF for comment.
“We have lost our beautiful daughter, sister, friend and mother. Annabel was a truly wonderful woman,” the tribute read.
“She touched the hearts of so many.
“She gave her life to helping the vulnerable and the disadvantaged whether it was in refugee camps in Africa or setting up MamaSuze in London, to enhance the lives of survivors of forced displacement and gender-based violence.”
When I got to Chequers on Sunday, the prime minister had clearly been up for most of the night and hitting the phones all morning with calls to fellow leaders in Europe and the Middle East, as he and others scrambled to try to contain a very dangerous situation.
His primary message was to try to reassure the public that the UK government was working to stabilise the region as best it could and press for a return to diplomacy.
But what struck me in our short interview was not what he did say but what he didn’t – what he couldn’t – say about the US strikes.
It was clear from his swerve on the question of whether the UK supported the strikes that the prime minister neither wanted to endorse US strikes nor overtly criticise President Donald Trump.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
4:00
Starmer reacts to US strikes on Iran
Instead, his was a form of words – repeated later in a joint statement of the E3 (the UK, Germany and France) – to acknowledge the US strikes and reiterate where they can agree: the need to prevent Iran having a nuclear weapon.
He also didn’t want to engage in the very obvious observation that President Trump simply isn’t listening to Sir Keir Starmer or other allies, who had been very publicly pressing for de-escalation all week, from the G7 summit in Canada to this weekend as European countries convened talks in Geneva with Iran.
Image: Donald Trump and Sir Keir Starmer at the G7 in Canada last week. Pic: Reuters
It was only five days ago that the prime minister told me he didn’t think a US attack was imminent, when I asked him what was going on following President Trump’s abrupt decision to quit the G7 early and convene his security council at the White House.
When I asked him if he felt foolish or frustrated that Trump had done that and didn’t seem to be listening, he told me it was a “fast moving situation” with a “huge amount of discussions in the days since the G7” and said he was intensely pressing his consistent position of de-escalation.
What else really could he say? He has calculated that criticising Trump goes against UK interests and has no other option but to press for a diplomatic solution and work with other leaders to achieve that aim.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:15
What is Operation ‘Midnight Hammer’?
Before these strikes, Tehran was clear it would not enter negotiations until Israel stopped firing missiles into Iran – something Israel is still saying it is not prepared to do.
The US has been briefing that one of the reasons it took action was because it did not think the Iranians were taking the talks convened by the Europeans in Geneva seriously enough.
It is hard now to see how these strikes will not serve but to deepen the conflict in the Middle East and the mood in government is bleak.
Iran will probably conclude that continuing to strike only Israel in light of the US attacks – the first airstrikes ever by the US on Iran – is a response that will make the regime seem weak.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
But escalation could draw the UK into a wider conflict it does not want. If Iran struck US assets, it could trigger Article 5 of NATO (an attack on one is an attack on all) and draw the UK into military action.
If Iran chose to attack the US via proxies, then UK bases and assets could be under threat.
The prime minister was at pains to stress on Sunday that the UK had not been involved in these strikes.
Meanwhile, the UK-controlled airbase on Diego Garcia was not used to launch the US attacks.
There was no request to use the Diego Garcia base, the president moving unilaterally, underlining his disinterest in what the UK has to say.
The world is waiting nervously to see how Iran might respond, as the PM moves more military assets to the region while simultaneously hitting the phones.
The prime minister may be deeply opposed to this war, but stopping it is not in his gift.
Initially, only those with a body mass index of over 40 who have at least four other health problems linked to obesity will be eligible.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:21
Can you get pregnant when on weight loss drugs?
Some doctors have raised concerns about the additional workload this new programme will bring, while pharmacists fear it could lead to supply shortages.
Dr Claire Fuller from NHS England said: “We urgently need to address rising levels of obesity and prioritise support for those who are experiencing severe ill health – and greater access to weight loss drugs will make a significant difference to the lives of those people.”
She added: “While not everyone will be eligible for weight loss drugs, it’s important that anyone who is worried about the impact of their weight on their health discusses the range of NHS support available with their healthcare professional.”
More on Nhs
Related Topics:
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:22
Weight loss drugs ‘changing way we see obesity’
The chairwoman of the Royal College of GPs welcomed NHS England’s decision to pursue a phased rollout, and said current workloads must be factored in to ensure the jabs can be prescribed safely.
Professor Kamila Hawthorne went on to say: “While weight loss medications have a lot of potential benefits for patients who are struggling to lose weight and who meet all the clinical criteria for a prescription, they mustn’t be seen as a ‘silver bullet’ to aid weight loss.
“We also need to see a focus on prevention, stopping people becoming overweight in the first place so they don’t require a medical intervention later.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
9:19
‘How I tried to get weight loss drugs’
Her remarks were echoed by the National Pharmacy Association’s chairman Olivier Picard, who says “prescribing these medications alone misses the point”.
He argued that they need to be part of a comprehensive strategy that includes lifestyle coaching, exercise and nutritional guidance – but many GPs currently “lack the bandwidth” to provide this support.
“As a result, we could end up in a situation where patients are prescribed the medication, lose weight, and then experience rebound weight gain once the course ends – simply because the foundational lifestyle changes weren’t addressed,” Mr Picard added.
Estimates suggest about 29% of the adult population is obese.
Health Secretary Wes Streeting says the government “is determined to bring revolutionary modern treatments to everyone who needs them, not just those who can afford to pay”.