← Back to House of Commons Debates
Civil Service Appointments
30 June 2020
Lead MP
Nick Thomas-Symonds
Debate Type
General Debate
Tags
No tags
Other Contributors: 64
At a Glance
Nick Thomas-Symonds raised concerns about civil service appointments in the House of Commons. A government minister responded. Other MPs also contributed.
How the Debate Unfolded
MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said:
Lead Contributor
Opened the debate
Asked the Home Secretary to make a statement on the appointment of the National Security Adviser and other senior civil service positions. Raised concerns about the politicisation of the National Security Adviser role and questioned the Government's decision.
Michael Gove
12:36:00
Outlined the Prime Minister’s plans for a new structure of Cabinet committees, emphasising the separation of roles between National Security Adviser and Cabinet Secretary. Praised Sir Mark Sedwill's service and introduced David Frost as the new NSA, highlighting his diplomatic experience.
Lindsay Hoyle
Speaker
Chorley
Suggested that future statements on such matters should be formal debates rather than urgent questions.
Torfaen
Expressed concerns about the politicisation of the National Security Adviser role, questioning its impact on independent and impartial advice. Asked for clarity on Mr Frost's accountability, involvement in civil service code of conduct, and consultations with intelligence agencies.
Michael Gove
12:36:00
Responded to Labour’s concerns by defending the appointment of David Frost as a distinguished public servant capable of giving unbiased advice. Emphasised that Prime Ministers should have confidence in their advisers while maintaining the integrity of public service.
Theresa May
12:36:00
Paid tribute to Sir Mark Sedwill and questioned why David Frost, lacking direct expertise in national security, was appointed as a political appointee without proven experience.
Joanna Cherry
12:36:00
Critiqued the Government's decision on the NSA appointment, suggesting it is part of a broader trend towards politicising the civil service. Questioned David Frost’s suitability for the role given his background as a diplomat rather than in security.
William Wragg
12:36:00
Questions whether the combination of the National Security Adviser and Cabinet Secretary posts is a recent innovation. Asks if the Civil Service Commission will recommend only current or former permanent secretaries for the role of Cabinet Secretary.
Yvette Cooper
Lab
Pontefract, Castleford and Knottingley
Asks whether the new National Security Adviser will be responsible for performance reviews of heads of MI5, MI6, and GCHQ. Emphasises the importance of avoiding political interference in these crucial intelligence agencies.
Jacob Young
12:36:00
References a speech by Michael Gove about serving forgotten communities better and asks what steps are being taken to ensure that constituents in Redcar and Cleveland are not forgotten.
Wendy Chamberlain
Lib Dem
North East Fife
Points out the Minister’s commitment to diversifying expertise and asks how this applies to David Frost's appointment as a non-expert, part-time National Security Adviser.
Bob Stewart
12:36:00
Asks for clarification on reporting lines within the security services and the role of the National Security Adviser in relation to Cabinet Ministers and Prime Minister.
John McNally
12:36:00
Critiques recent personnel changes, asking why distinguished civil servants have been dismissed while someone with great power but no responsibility remains employed.
James Sunderland
12:36:00
Asks about the extent to which security considerations will be on the table during Brexit negotiations and Frost's role in the integrated review.
Andrew Mitchell
Con
Sutton Coldfield
Questions the centrality of the National Security Council, emphasising its importance in wiring together defence, diplomacy, and development for national interest.
Steve McCabe
12:36:00
Asks if David Frost will have completed his duties as EU negotiator by the time he takes up his new role or if it remains a part-time position.
Brendan Clarke-Smith
12:36:00
Praises Sir Mark Sedwill for his service and agrees that fundamental changes in the civil service should reflect people's priorities, beyond personnel changes at the top.
Matt Western
Lab
Warwick and Leamington
Questions whether the appointment of David Frost as National Security Adviser reflects a shift from valuing experts to prioritising special advisers. Asks if we have moved from 'Yes, Minister' to 'Yes, special adviser'.
Michael Gove
Con
Defended his previous statements about experts, supported the split of roles for the Cabinet Secretary and head of the Civil Service, praised the civil service's determination to put public service first, emphasised the need for reform in delivering better government services, reassured that David Frost will take on national security responsibilities after Brexit negotiations conclude, defended political appointments in government as important for agenda delivery, underlined that advisers are there to advise and not run the country, rejected criticisms about politicising civil service roles by pointing out Labour's lack of experience with such roles, reaffirmed commitment to attracting new talent to the civil service, clarified that David Frost will be available for parliamentary scrutiny, emphasised the importance of a 'strong grip' at the centre for effective governance.
John Redwood
Con
Supported the split of roles and urged for improvement in data accuracy, timeliness, and relevance to aid better decision-making by Ministers and senior managers throughout the civil service.
Margaret Ferrier
SNP
Critiqued the Dominic Cummings Government's impact on senior civil servants, highlighting toxic workplace conditions and concerns over US-style political appointments.
Asked for reassurances that changes to the top team of the civil service will accelerate the delivery of the Government's levelling-up agenda.
Hilary Benn
Lab
Leeds South
Expressed concerns about David Frost taking on the role of National Security Adviser while continuing his duties as EU chief negotiator, questioning who will prioritise national security if negotiations continue beyond October.
Edward Leigh
Con
Gainsborough
Highlighted the independence and expertise of civil servants in matters of national security and questioned the hype around political advisors like Dominic Cummings.
Rushanara Ali
Lab
Bethnal Green and Stepney
Questioned why the Government were politicising important civil service appointments, especially regarding the National Security Adviser role.
Sara Britcliffe
Con
Asked about steps to attract new talent and ensure proper representation across various constituencies in the civil service.
Stephen Farry
12:36:00
Asked how the Government planned to reconcile David Frost's dual roles as National Security Adviser and Brexit negotiator, given his involvement in negotiations with European allies.
Thomas Tugendhat
Con
Tonbridge
Praised Sir Mark Sedwill for his work and emphasised the importance of building alliances rather than focusing solely on 'Britain first'.
Kevan Jones
12:36:00
Asked if parliamentary committees would be able to summon David Frost for scrutiny, given that he is not a Minister but a special envoy.
Jerome Mayhew
Con
Broadland and Fakenham
Agreed with the importance of having someone in the National Security Adviser role who commands Prime Ministerial confidence and demonstrated ability, referencing the NSC's potential benefits from a 'strong grip' at the centre.
Ronnie Cowan
SNP
Inverclyde
During an evidence session of the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee last March, Mark Sedwill came under considerable scrutiny regarding the demands of fulfilling two very important roles. The Minister is now asking David Frost potentially to do the same, as he is currently the UK Government’s chief Brexit negotiator and, as was mentioned earlier, he has stated that that is his “top single priority”. Given his lack of experience of the wider security and defence agenda, does the Minister not think that his entire focus from day one should go on this new job, or is the role of National Security Adviser now reduced to being a yes man to the Prime Minister?
Michael Gove
Con
Spalding
I gently remind the hon. Gentleman that the role of National Security Adviser did not exist before 2010; it was created by David Cameron as Prime Minister. The hon. Gentleman is also quite wrong to say that David Frost has no experience in these areas. He is a distinguished diplomat, he has been an ambassador, and he is dealing with negotiations at the moment that involve security and defence co-operation.
Andrew Griffith
Con
Arundel and South Downs
Does my right hon. Friend share my genuine confusion at the ambivalence of those on the Opposition Benches and at the fact that someone who was first appointed to the Foreign Office at a time when the shadow Home Secretary was seven years old and who has served in Denmark, Paris, Cyprus and the United Nations does not command their full support?
Chris Bryant
Lab
Rhondda
If I am honest, I do not really care who the Prime Minister appoints as his National Security Adviser. It is entirely up to him; he can appoint all the duff ambassadors who have ever walked through the Foreign Office, if that is what he wants to do. However, my fear is that in creating this mixed role, where somebody is a quasi-Minister who has been given a job for life in the House of Lords, who is a member of the legislature but it is meant to be a special adviser, and who is a special adviser who can none the less give direction to civil servants, he has created Frankenstein’s monster.
Harriett Baldwin
Con
West Worcestershire
The National Security Adviser is clearly a very important role. It should be a separate role and I am sure that David Frost is well qualified to do it. On the confidentiality of secure Government information, could the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster update the House on what happened to the investigation into the leak of the diplomatic telegrams from Sir Kim Darroch?
Angela Eagle
Lab
Wallasey
I congratulate the Secretary of State for making the most outrageous points and keeping a straight face. He is very good at doing that. Will he answer the question asked right at the beginning of this debate by the former Prime Minister, the right hon. Member for Maidenhead (Mrs May)? Precisely what are the new National Security Adviser’s qualifications in national security, which, after all, all of us care about because it is about the safety and security of each and every person in this country? What are his specific qualifications and expertise, and why on earth, given his other job, was he considered even for a second for this role?
David Simmonds
Con
Ruislip, Northwood and Pinner
Does my right hon. Friend agree that a key lesson from all research about politically led organisations is that one-size-fits-all structures are doomed to fail, that leaders need to be able to structure their top teams to best deploy the available talent, and that leaders remain politically accountable for any decisions that they take as a result of their advice?
Anne McLaughlin
SNP
Glasgow North East
To my mind, it is just inexplicable that the Government would seek to completely overhaul the civil service at a time when stability and clarity are crucial in tackling the covid crisis. Why on earth have the Government chosen a time of unprecedented uncertainty to dismiss the head of the civil service and then to set out on the inherently ideological vision of the unelected Dominic Cummings to politicise the UK’s world-class civil service?
Dehenna Davison
Con
Barking
I join many colleagues across the House in paying tribute to Sir Mark Sedwill for his many years of distinguished service. Today, we heard the Prime Minister talk about levelling up and about how talent is spread right across our country. There is great talent in Bishop Auckland, but many young people in the north-east do not see the civil service as an achievable place to work. Does my right hon. Friend agree that getting some major elements of the civil service out of London—perhaps into County Durham—is a great start to making that happen?
Tan Dhesi
Lab
Slough
The first duty of any Government is to keep their citizens and their country safe and secure. However, the Prime Minister, having gradually forced out a highly respected national security expert, has decided to replace him as National Security Adviser with his political friend—someone who has never worked in defence or security intelligence and who, in fact, until recently was the head of the Scotch Whisky Association and the chief executive officer of the London Chamber of Commerce and Industry. Can the Minister explain why the Government hate hiring experts? Will he also confirm widespread rumours that the Prime Minister believes his plumber should be the next manager of the England football team?
Julian Lewis
Con
New Forest East
My right hon. Friend may not be aware that there was a six-month stand-off in 2018 between the then Defence Committee and No. 10 over whether Sir Mark Sedwill, newly appointed as National Security Adviser, should appear before that Committee, because it was argued that he appeared before the Joint Committee on the National Security Strategy and he need not come to us. Can my right hon. Friend give us an assurance that this National Security Adviser will indeed testify as required before all relevant Committees, including the Foreign Affairs Committee, the Defence Committee and, who knows, the ISC, if it is re-established by then?
Emma Hardy
Lab
Kingston upon Hull West and Haltemprice
The Minister must have misheard the question from the Chair of the Home Affairs Committee, but, because I am very kind, I will ask him again. Will the party politically appointed National Security Adviser be responsible for the performance reviews of the independent heads of intelligence and security services?
It will not be the case that there will be any individual responsible for that, no.
Does my right hon. Friend agree that appointments to civil service positions need to reflect the experience of people of all backgrounds to be relevant to the needs of the hour? That means all types of school, all parts of the country, people from the charity sector and the private sector, as well, of course, as talented and skilled public servants?
Yes, I absolutely do agree, and diversity of background and cognitive diversity are important in public service.
Stephen Doughty
Lab Co-op
Cardiff South and Penarth
The idea that this is about social mobility is for the birds. General Sir Richard Barrons, the former chief of Joint Forces Command and indeed a Deputy Chief of the Defence Staff, described this as “a move for ‘chumocracy’. Someone in Boris Johnson’s inner circle is being moved higher up the inner circle”. He also said that “when it comes to matters of security, his knowledge is zero, and that is a matter of concern.” One of the key lessons from the Chilcot inquiry was the importance of speaking truth to power. How can a political appointee of this nature, part of the chumocracy, speak truth to power?
I note that the Chilcot inquiry was an inquiry into the conduct of foreign affairs under a Labour Administration. Anyone who has seen how those in the National Security Secretariat discharge their responsibilities under this Administration will know that they consistently speak truth to power.
May I put on record my thanks to Sir Mark Sedwill for his public service? I served with him when he was permanent secretary at the Home Office, and I served in that Department as Immigration Minister. I know that he brings a tremendous set of skills and has served our country faithfully over many years. Looking at the responsibilities of the National Security Adviser as the secretary to the National Security Council, which covers a wide range of matters, not just national security, it seems to me that David Frost is eminently qualified. That council also has the heads of the agencies and the military chief sitting on it. May I ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster whether, given all the threats and challenges facing the country, he anticipates the National Security Council sitting relatively frequently in the months to come?
I am really grateful to my right hon. Friend for making that point; I should have made it earlier. It is the case that when the National Security Council sits, it is absolutely required that the representatives of the various security and intelligence agencies that keep us safe are there, along with key military and diplomatic figures. The National Security Adviser is one of a number of those with expertise, and it is the case that the National Security Council is now meeting more frequently, not least to take forward the integrated review that I know he supports.
Don’t prorogue Parliament as the Supreme Court will find it unlawful. Don’t approve this planning application, Secretary Jenrick, as it will be found unlawful. Is this not just the latest case of the Government absolutely ignoring civil servants and making party political appointments that are wholly inappropriate. Does the Minister agree with that?
It may surprise the hon. Gentleman, but, no, I do not. Of course, we benefit from impartial and authoritative advice, but, ultimately, Ministers decide. It is certainly the case that, in the Scottish Government, I know that the excellent civil servants there provide robust challenge, but, just occasionally, Ministers of the Scottish Government sometimes take a different view.
Desmond Swayne
Con
New Forest West
You would think that nothing had changed since the fall of Thomas Cromwell. Has my right hon. Friend read Hilary Mantel’s “The Mirror and the Light”? It is not really like that, is it?
I have not had the opportunity to read Ms Mantel’s latest novel, but I hope to have the opportunity to do so over the summer. My right hon. Friend is absolutely right to point out that, historically, government has been carried on by a mixture of those who are dedicated public servants in the civil service and outside appointees of a political hue.
Chi Onwurah
Lab
Newcastle upon Tyne Central and West
On Radio 4’s “Today” programme yesterday, the Secretary of State for Education said that making the National Security Adviser a political appointment was following the example of the United States. President Trump has had well-documented rows with his security services. I always say that when it comes to issues such as Huawei or other security issues, we can follow and trust in the advice of our security services because we know it is non-political. Can I still say that?
Yes, absolutely. If advice comes from the agencies, then that advice will always go, absolutely direct, to the Prime Minister and to the relevant politician. The record of previous national security advisers in the United States of America, from Condoleezza Rice to Henry Kissinger, is a distinguished one. Having people of that stature reflects well on the Presidents who appointed them, and it makes the case that a national security adviser of the kind that David Cameron introduced is a welcome innovation.
Richard Holden
Con
Basildon and Billericay
In 1987, David Frost was appointed to start his career in the diplomatic service. He served there for a quarter of a century. He has since served in senior appointments both in government and in the private sector. Does the Minister agree that it is exactly people with this range of experience that we need in senior government positions?
My hon. Friend, who has served in government as a political appointee, knows absolutely whereof he speaks. As I say, I find it somewhat curious that Opposition Members who have themselves supported the Government on many, many political appointees are now having a fit of the vapours at the idea that there should be a political appointee.
The Minister claims that there was an issue with Sir Mark Sedwill carrying out two roles, so how is it practical to combine the role of National Security Adviser with a commitment to intensify EU negotiations—or have the Government already given up on a good deal?
It is precisely because we do want a good deal that negotiations are being intensified. That decision was taken by the Prime Minister and by the Presidents of the European Commission, the European Parliament and the European Council. We all wish those involved bonne chance.
Andrew Murrison
Con
South West Wiltshire
I very much welcome the appointment of David Frost, who is well qualified for the roles that my right hon. Friend has outlined. At the weekend in a Government press release, David Frost is said to have said that he is particularly exercised by the importance of the integrated review and the formation of the new Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office. What role does my right hon. Friend envisage for David Frost in the formation of that very welcome new Department? When will the new permanent secretary be appointed to the Department? Does my right hon. Friend agree that he or she has to be an excellent change manager? What relationship will David Frost have to the new perm sec?
That is a very thoughtful set of questions from a very successful previous Minister in the Foreign Office. It is right that the integrated review should look at how diplomacy, aid, and defence and security mesh. He is right that David Frost’s experience equips him well for that role. There will be no single individual who will be reviewing these matters. There will be a range of people, including existing civil servants. I should add that one of those is also involved as another political appointee in the Prime Minister’s policy unit—a biographer of Clement Attlee. I am sure that the hon. Member for Torfaen (Nick Thomas-Symonds) would agree that that is a qualification for high office.
Listening to the excellent Minister, I have learned that the National Security Adviser is not going to be a civil servant or a special adviser but a special envoy who will travel all over the world. Since we are adopting the idea from America of appointing people into government who support the Government—not a bad thing, I would say—would it not also be a good idea to take from America the idea of confirmation hearings and let this appointment be made only after a Committee of this House has held a confirmation hearing?
That is an interesting constitutional innovation. I remember that when I was shadow Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families, the then Children’s Commissioner was interviewed by the Education Committee. The Committee said that she should not be appointed, but the then Secretary of State, Ed Balls, did appoint her, and he was entirely within his rights to do so. Of course Select Committees have an important role to play, but ultimately Ministers decide.
National security is reserved, but protecting communities requires co-operation with Governments and agencies that are devolved. How can the devolved Administrations have confidence in a lead official who acts not in the wider public interest, but at the beck and call of the Prime Minister?
I think that the devolved Administrations can have confidence in David Frost. He has talked to the Ministers in the devolved Administrations who are concerned with the fate of the EU negotiations. We were reminded by the hon. Member for Slough (Mr Dhesi) that David Frost was, for a while, chief executive of the Scotch Whisky Association, so those in Speyside and elsewhere in Scotland can be confident that this is a man who has their best interests at heart.
Government Response
Government Response
Defended the appointment of David Frost and emphasised that Prime Ministers should have confidence in their advisers while maintaining the integrity of public service. I gently remind the hon. Gentleman that the role of National Security Adviser did not exist before 2010; it was created by David Cameron as Prime Minister. The hon. Gentleman is also quite wrong to say that David Frost has no experience in these areas. He is a distinguished diplomat, he has been an ambassador, and he is dealing with negotiations at the moment that involve security and defence co-operation.
▸
Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy
About House of Commons Debates
House of Commons debates take place in the main chamber of the House of Commons. These debates cover a wide range of topics including government policy, legislation, and current affairs. MPs from all parties can participate, question ministers, and hold the government accountable for its decisions.