http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...obligation-help-afghan-interpreters-mps-hear/ The UK has a “moral obligation” to look after local staff who helped troops and diplomats during the Afghan campaign, but current schemes to protect them from Taliban reprisals are not enough, MPs were told. The Government has faced accusations it has abandoned Afghan interpreters after refusing to give them sanctuary for helping British forces. “If we don’t look after those we need in conflict, whether it’s the soldiers we need to defend us or the sailors or airmen, and I would include in that the locally employed staff, we will find it significantly harder to recruit those people we need and that will make us less safe.” One interpreter had lost three limbs while serving with British forces. Mr Tugendhat said when he pressed the case for the man to be brought to Britain, an official told him “it would set a precedent”. The man later moved to India. He said any solution had to find a balance to let the right people in. “It can’t be that one day’s service as a cleaner in Camp Bastion gives you a British passport, but at the same time it’s screamingly obvious that someone who has been a triple amputee on operational service has the right to access the medical unit at Selly Oak.” . Surely the disabled interpreter should have been helped? What criteria would you use for giving help to those who have helped our military?