Observations on the defence review, Sergei Lavrov and possible sleaze

Some brief remarks on a few stories which have flitted across the news and are wroth noting: the Strategic Defence Review, Sergei Lavrov and rail minister Lord Hendy

As has happened before, a few news stories have caught my eye over the past few days which have some significance but aren’t (yet) worth spending a whole article or essay on, so once again I’ll bundle them up in a digest here to flag them and return to them if they continue to be important.

The Strategic Defence Review

I have been on the whole critical of the new government on defence because I think such policy as it has espoused is at best muddled and at worst detached from reality, all of which is slightly ironic as John Healey, the defence secretary, is one of the few members of the current cabinet for whom I have some time and who I think is sensible and straightforward. However, in headline terms, the decision to undertake a defence review is a reasonable one: a similar exercise took place in 1998, shortly after Labour came to power last time, the Conservative/Liberal Democrat coalition government held a review in 2010 and there was another such process after the Conservatives formed a single-party government in 2015. Labour had first bruited a review more than a year ago, and Healey confirmed it would happen in a speech at Policy Exchange in February this year.

There are aspects of the review process which I question, but it was bold and innovative of Healey to appoint three independent figures to undertake the review rather than it being carried out purely by Ministry of Defence officials. The lead reviewer is Lord Robertson of Port Ellen, who as defence secretary from 1997 to 1999 oversaw Labour’s last full-scale strategic defence review and then became secretary general of NATO (1999-2003). He is assisted by Dr Fiona Hill, a British academic who moved to the United States and eventually served as senior director for Europe and Russia at the National Security Council, and General Sir Richard Barrons, a distinguished soldier whose final posting was as commander Joint Forces Command (2013-16), the tri-service command responsible for managing and delivering capabilities drawn from all three branches of the armed forces.

Over the past few days, the Ministry of Defence announced that six new experts would be joining the Defence Review Team to support the work of Robertson, Hill and Barrons. In the words of Lord Robertson, the new appointments “provide an incredibly valuable range of experience across the defence and security sectors, both in the UK and internationally” and should make a positive contribution to the review process. They are as follows:

• Sir Jeremy Quin: former Conservative MP for Horsham, he was minister of state for defence procurement 2020-22 and chair of the House of Commons Defence Committee for the first months of 2024, as well as briefly serving as a minister in the Cabinet Office responsible for the Government Commercial Function. He will provide expertise in acquisition.

• Angus Lapsley: now NATO assistant secretary general for defence policy and planning, he has worked in the Ministry of Defence, the Foreign Office and the European and Global Issues Secretariat in the Cabinet Office so brings a blend of international relations, defence and security expertise. (The media have not held back from reminding readers that in 2021 he mislaid classified MoD documents which were later found at a bus stop in Kent.)

• Edward Dinsmore: now a senior partner at global consultancy Korn Ferry, he oversaw various transformation programmes at the Ministry of Justice before becoming director Army Reform at the MoD and a member of the Army Board. He had a particular focus on data analytics and established the UK Defence Digital Service, and will look especially at personnel issues as part of the SDR.

• Robin Marshall: co-head of global private equity at Bain Capital, he was previously a partner at 3i and before that worked for McKinsey and Company and Procter and Gamble. He is lead non-executive director on the Defence Nuclear Board and a non-executive member of the Defence Board and brings experience of industry.

• Grace Cassy: co-founder of CyLon Ventures, which invests in security and resilience start-ups, she spent 10 years in the Diplomatic Service, including as assistant private secretary for foreign affairs to Tony Blair as prime minister, co-founded Epsilon Advisory Partners and sits on the advisory board of Ten Eleven Ventures. (Some sources have described her as “Blair’s national security adviser”, which is somewhat misleading.) She will advise on the use of technology in defence and security.

• Jean-Christophe Gray: currently director general for delivery in the Cabinet Office, he held various posts in HM Treasury and the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, and from 2012 to 2021 was the prime minister’s official spokesman. He then spent three years as private secretary to the Duke of Cambridge (now the Prince of Wales). He has been chosen for his experience in the Treasury and of cross-government co-operation.

These new advisers bring a range of perspectives and experiences to the review process. It is certainly to be welcomed, and the degree of external expertise may prove valuable in crafting the review’s recommendations. It is, though, important not to become fixated on names. The real challenges of the SDR will come in terms of commitments, force structure, procurement and, ultimately, resources.

Lavrov: dead or alive?

Rumours began circulating on social media on Saturday that Sergei Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister, had died. He is 74 years old and was supposedly treated for a heart condition in 2022. There has been no official statement from the Kremlin, but Ukraine’s permanent representative to the United Nations, Sergiy Kyslytsya, hinted on social media that Lavrov was indeed dead.

Lavrov has been foreign minister of Russia for 20 years, the longest tenure since the revolution in 1917, and was his country’s permanent representative to the UN for a decade before that. Since the invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, he has regularly enunciated a combination of hard-line stances and blatant falsehoods, but Dr Bobo Lo of foreign affairs think tank Chatham House suggested some years ago that Lavrov is not “part of Putin’s inner sanctum”, and is “a tough, reliable, extremely sophisticated negotiator but the toughening of Russian foreign policy has got very little to do with him”.

It is dangerous to read too much into the lack of comment from Moscow, although it is indicative of the kind of culture of secrecy in which Russia is governed. It does prima facie seem odd that there has been no immediate denial, if Lavrov is indeed fit and well, but we should be wary of assumptions. While it would be an unexpected development, the disappearance of Lavrov might not have much effect on Russia’s foreign policy.

Little local difficulties

The rail minister, Lord Hendy of Richmond Hill, was trumpeted as one of Sir Keir Starmer’s “expert” appointments when the prime minister formed his government at the beginning of July. He was a long-term London Transport employee, eventually serving as commissioner of Transport for London from 2006 to 2015 before being appointed chairman of Network Rail.

However, Hendy has encountered two potential challenges in recent days. Politico reported last week that he had an engineer sacked earlier this year for raising concern about safety at Euston station with the media. The Department for Transport has so far declined to comment on the matter. In addition, James Heale of The Spectator drew attention to an episode in 2013, when Hendy was accused of an extra-marital affair with a “call girl” called Rachael Grundy, whom he allegedly supplied with pre-paid Oyster cards as gifts.

Of these two furores, the former is clearly more serious than the latter in terms of Hendy’s conduct and the government will eventually have to make some public statement. It may well be that it is a disproportionately prominent story during August’s silly season, but the gravity of the allegations themselves are not the only factor. As with the ongoing controversy over the appointment of pseudo-political candidates to civil service positions—which is now being examined by the Civil Service Commission—it is magnified in importance because of the emphasis the Labour Party put on probity and ethics before the election. The prime minister has yet to confirm that he will allow the independent adviser on ministers’ interests, Sir Laurie Magnus, to undertake investigations on his own initiative, and no apparent progress has yet been made on the promised establishment of an Ethics and Integrity Commission with an independent chair “to ensure probity in government”.

Obviously it is early in the government’s life; it has only been in power for two months, and every incoming administration has to prioritise the promises it has made to secure electoral victory. At the same time, it was a conscious choice by Sir Keir Starmer to use ethics and integrity in government as an election issue and he knew he was thereby raising expectations among voters. With Parliament returning from its truncated summer adjournment, these criticisms and allegations may melt away as everyday politics reassert themselves; but they may not. With its standing in the opinion polls having slumped in recent weeks, the government needs to be careful.

(Fun fact: Lord Hendy of Richmond Hill’s elder brother, barrister Lord Hendy KC, is also a Labour life peer.)

What’s next?

As Westminster returns, it is a busy week in prospect. Tomorrow the House of Commons considers committee and remaining stages of the Passenger Railway Services (Public Ownership) Bill, which will gradually renationalise the rail network; on Wednesday it is committee and remaining stages of the Budget Responsibility Bill, the government’s much vaunted never-again-Truss legislation which strengthens the powers of the Office for Budget Responsibility; and on Thursday the Commons will debate the Second Reading of the Great British Energy Bill. On Wednesday, Conservative MPs will vote for the first time in the party leadership contest to eliminate one or two of the six candidates (it is not yet clear how many will be given their bus fare home, as Jim Bowen used to say). This afternoon, the House of Lords will consider a Second Reading of the Crown Estate Bill [Lords]. Meanwhile, in Paris, President Macron will resume talks to find a realistic candidate to replace Gabriel Attal as prime minister, with the front runner currently believed to be former Socialist Bernard Cazeneuve, who last held the post for six months in 2016-17 under President François Hollande. Good luck with that one, Manu…