Speeches by Norman.

“Thank you very much for coming in, Sir Stephen. To pick up on the point that Michelle raised, you will be familiar with the fact that the UK has a slightly inglorious history of doing stuff and then moving on. The nuclear sector is a classic example. If you talk to people in Sizewell, they will say that Sizewell A has …”

“Okay. Do you spend a lot of time on pillar 2? What can be done to improve its credibility and pace of change?”

“Yes, and of course civil nuclear is quite an interesting example, because we had 30 or 40 years in which we basically bought one of each of a different kind—in other words, we did not avail ourselves of any of the benefits of batch production or the fact that your first one is going to cost a fortune, but your average …”

“Obviously, it is a difficult question, because you want to hit the ground running. We have had testimony here about the importance of getting moving quickly—every day counts—but you are also talking about a 20, 30 or 40-year commitment overall. Is there any budgetary mechanism we can put in place with the Treasury to g…”

“I am sure I speak for many Members when I thank you, Mr Speaker, and the whole of the Speaker’s Office for the work you have put in to make this past week of remembrance so memorable. The gardens of remembrance, the projection of images from the second world war on to the Elizabeth Tower, the wreath laying in Westminst…”

“Will the Leader of the House give us the forthcoming business?”

“Gentlemen, it has been very interesting testimony—thank you so much. You have described to us an MoD and a defence establishment that is talking about reform, but in a context of being pre-war across Europe, and actually at war on the fringes. There is therefore a massive disjunct between the pace of activity as it app…”

“Right, but the claim was made earlier that somehow reform was opposed to warfighting when, in fact, it is essential for warfighting.”

“That two-year gap is killing the demand signal.”

“A final question, if I may. Obviously, reform is not just about the MoD; it is also about the transmission of culture and effect through the whole defence establishment. One of the things we are seeing is that, in many ways, our prime contractors are not responding fast enough to deal with some of the issues we are tal…”

“That is exactly the point I want to make. We do not have a culture of readiness or outcomes in the way that you would expect.”

“That is our view, but they will not give us the information, so we cannot judge it.”

“Are you seeing any of those fractures or signs in the Defence programme reforms?”

“That is my point. That is about culture and driving. You said that capability programme was “completely botched”.”

“Or possibly at the same time, or possibly after. Matthew, does the reform programme have the right leadership, the right resourcing or the right plan? Or how far has it?”

“That is interesting.”

“No, but the contrast you were bringing out is operational versus managerial.”

“You are right, but we are talking slightly at cross purposes. I want to get your answer to the question of whether reform has the right leadership, plan and resources. The way I am going to get to that is by highlighting that your argument draws a distinction about what appears to be managerial, steady as she goes due …”

“I want to ask about how good you think the leadership of the reform programme is at the moment, and the point you have made about the changes of culture. It seems to me that we know what good culture looks like in the civil service. It is very fast, responsive and outcome-oriented, and we have not got it—is that right?”

“Can you put us straight on that?”