For the Government to turn its back on a group of Iraqi interpreters who risked their lives working for British troops in southern Iraq is utterly wrong. The failure to relocate or pay compensation to people who fell through the cracks of a limited assistance scheme is turning once-supportive elements of Iraqi society against Britain. It sets a grim precedent for future campaigns when soldiers might again seek to employ local staff.

Much has improved since The Times first revealed the plight of the interpreters in August 2007 after a man called Alaa approached me while I was embedded with British troops in Basra. “Please,” he said. “Can you help? The Danish forces are flying their interpreters to Denmark, but Britain is doing nothing for us. If we stay in Iraq we will die.”

Seen as traitors by the militiamen who effectively controlled Basra at that time, a number of interpreters and other Iraqis employed by British soldiers had been kidnapped, tortured and killed. The militants threatened many more, telling them to quit their job or face the same fate.

Britain had no policy in place to offer help or protection until David Miliband finally announced the assistance scheme in October 2007. Interpreters and their families literally danced in delight at the news, but then the restrictions became clear. Applicants had to prove they had worked for 12 consecutive months from the start of 2005 — a difficult burden for many who were forced to quit before 2006. Others hired by contractors also fell foul because they were not directly employed by Britain.

Alaa is one of some 200 interpreters and other former employees lucky enough to satisfy the criteria and be resettled in the UK. Hundreds more opted for a cash payout. Almost 700, however, were rejected. Of them, 25 will sue the Government for damages this week — a last resort for desperate people.

Mr Miliband argues that lines had to be drawn and that the aid is designed for the most deserving. This claim falls flat in the face of cases such as a man who was forced to leave his job after just six months because his father, also an interpreter, was executed. Another interpreter worked one week shy of the one-year minimum. Both men were rejected from the scheme and their appeals also failed, making the Government look mean-spirited.

Compared with other countries Britain was slow to draw up help. Its rejection of those who fail to meet the criteria heightens the sense that there was never a strong desire to help anyone in the first place.

Deborah Haynes is defence correspondent

Times Recommends

• A dose of defeat is just the medicine
• Protecting ourselves from Eurocreep
• After the summer of LUV, it'll still hurt