Gavin Williamson Sacked over Huawei Leaks

[WingsofRoffa]

DefSec Williamson has been axed.

Letter here: https://twitter.com/tpgcolson/status/1123631567224623104

Penny Mordaunt is the replacement.

[Treble one]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48126974

[NutLoose]

Shame, he struck me as a pro military minister as opposed to some of them that went before.

[pr00ne]

Agree with Nutloose. I fear that Defence will regret this loss.

[Melchett01]

I see Penny Morduant will retain her position as Minister for Women. Another part time Defence Secretary. Tells you everything you need to know, if you didn’t already have questions, about the PM’s opinion of the Forces. Disgusting.

I suspect this also means Williamson now has free rein to do as he sees fit now no longer constrained by Collective Responsibility.

[Imagegear]

He's denying all responsibility...was his phone hacked, which phone were the calls made from, did a "meeting" occur???

I doubt this will be the end of the story.

IG

[sharpend]

I doubt if May's government will last much longer anyway. Williamson is best out of it. As an aside, it seemed that May was, as usual, was/is going her own way anyway and ignoring the advice of her MOD staff.

And I think there is more to this than meets the eye. Is this a stitch-up?

[Auxtank]

Agree with Nutloose. I fear that Defence will regret this loss.

Agreed also.

I blame the Russians. Hacked his phone and set him up like a duck.

There's more to this story than meets the eye.

Either way it's a shame, he was good at his job.

[Fareastdriver]

You were all slagging him off when he first got the job.

https://www.pprune.org/military-aviation/601406-new-defence-secretary.html?highlight=Gavin+williamson

[racedo]

Inept, incompetent and great for jumping in without a clue.

When the list is drawn up of great Defence Secretaries he will not be listed on any page.

[Onceapilot]

Oh dear, what a pity! Who here can know? What I have seen of him, from open reporting, is...diddly-squat! Shouted his mouth off at times but, fell on his face repeatedly. Where is his "thrice rehashed" Defence review? I see no evidence of some great new dawn of political Defence reality waiting to emerge and, I sense a continued "Softly, softly, Oooops" ...! :rolleyes:

OAP

[Willard Whyte]

You were all slagging him off when he first got the job.

https://www.pprune.org/military-aviation/601406-new-defence-secretary.html?highlight=Gavin+williamson

Yes, I did. I was wrong (-ish), in that he at least seemed to be 'on our side'.

I wonder whether any members of the NSC own a Huawei 'phone...

[Out Of Trim]

I thought he was better than some of the previous Ministers, and stood up for The Armed Services rather well. I don't believe he leaked the NSC information. But someone did or otherwise the journalist added 2 and 2 and came up with the correct answer.

I'm pretty sure that Huawei equipment in our network could be a risk to out National Security. The rest of the Five Eyes certainly think so!

[BirdmanBerry]

Without knowing how they found this out, surely the paper should be forced to show their source seeing as it was in breach of the OSA?

[GeeRam]

When the list is drawn up of great Defence Secretaries he will not be listed on any page.

Is there even enough of those to be able to fill a single page :confused:

[The Old Fat One]

hahahahahaha

"Strong and stable government"

lololololololololol

[Willard Whyte]

At least she's previously been Minister of State for the Armed Forces and is a Royal Naval Reservist, so has some background in defence matters. Daughter of a former Para too.

Made I chuckle too (from Wiki):

When receiving The Spectator magazine's Parliamentarian of the Year award in November 2014, Mordaunt said that she had delivered a speech in the House of Commons just before the Easter recess in 2013 on poultry welfare so as to use the word "cock" as a forfeit for a misdemeanour during Naval Reserve training. Mordaunt used the word "cock" six times and "lay" or "laid" five times. Following her comments, she was accused by Labour MP Kate Hoey of trivialising parliament.

[ORAC]

https://order-order.com/

Gavin Williamson has responded to the PM’s letter (https://order-order.com/2019/05/01/gavin-williamson-sacked/)

Dear Prime Minister,

It has been a great privilege to serve as Defence Secretary and Chief Whip in your Government. Every day I have seen the extraordinary work of the men and women of our armed forces, who go to incredible lengths to defend our country.

I am sorry that you feel recent leaks from the National Security Council originated in my Department. I emphatically believe this was not the case. I strenuously deny that I was in any way involved in this leak and I am confident that a thorough and formal inquiry would have vindicated my position.

I have always trusted my civil servants, military advisers and staff. I believe the assurances they have given me.

I appreciate you offering me the option to resign, but to resign would have been to accept that I, my civil servants, my military advisers or my staff were responsible: this was not the case.

Restoring public confidence in the NSC is an ambition we both share. With that in mind I hope that your decision achieves this aim rather than being seen as a temporary distraction.

As I said there has been no greater privilege than working with our armed forces and I will continue to stand up for our service personnel and the superb work they do.

Yours,

Gavin

[Auxtank]

hahahahahaha

"Strong and stable government"

lololololololololol

Aside from your jocularity, I wonder; do you have any sort of plan as to how we might take the dear old country forward without us all becoming depressingly, wretchedly and ultimately a failure-bomb of pseudo-communism under Jeremy's silly little plans?

I ask purely for information.

Er, lol's - as they say...and as you have stated...

[racedo]

When receiving The Spectator magazine's Parliamentarian of the Year award in November 2014, Mordaunt said that she had delivered a speech in the House of Commons just before the Easter recess in 2013 on poultry welfare so as to use the word "cock" as a forfeit for a misdemeanour during Naval Reserve training. Mordaunt used the word "cock" six times and "lay" or "laid" five times. Following her comments, she was accused by Labour MP Kate Hoey of trivialising parliament.

Give her credit for it, as for trivialising parliment................ every day that is done,

[The Old Fat One]

Aside from your jocularity, I wonder; do you have any sort of plan as to how we might take the dear old country forward without us all becoming depressingly, wretchedly and ultimately a failure-bomb of pseudo-communism under Jeremy's silly little plans?

Seriously, I struggle to find any other response than "jocularity" when it comes to all matters Westminster. I have that in common with most other intelligent life forms on Planet Earth right now...we are a laughing stock...an accolade we have worked hard for, and which we richly deserve.

So no, I have no plan other than a dreamers wish that something better will emerge...but I'm afraid the cynic in me will not believe in any such possibility. So please leave me in peace with my sense of humour and a large bottle of single malt.

PS

I hold no candle for any political party currently existing...but I do feel the re-emergence of the old Monster Raving Looney Party would be marked improvement on any of the current lot.

PPS

And I repeat...


The sacking of Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson makes him the 38th person to have left the May Government in just over 12 months, and the sixth Cabinet minister. It’s a departure record.

...Strong and Stable Government

hahahahahahahahahahah :)

[ORAC]

Consider not as a resignation - but as an application for her job.....

[Out Of Trim]

ORAC,

Sounds like a plan! :ok:

[langleybaston]

I too have found him pro-armed forces. His refusal to resign reads very convincingly, and I think he may well have the ability to shaft the shafters ..... still a young man in political terms.

[oldmansquipper]

At least he 'appeared' to be on our side.

whereas.
https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1389/img_2200_png_ef4280fb8c6615c4699c589c79e4a0db8875e5da.jpeg

[AR1]

Lot of fuss over something thats not here yet. (5G). Its a good job they arent already in our established 2,3&4G Networks.
Oh hold on one second...

[oldmansquipper]

Lot of fuss over something thats not here yet. (5G). Its a good job they arent already in our established 2,3&4G Networks.
Oh hold on one second...

...are you sure you aren't getting mixed up with the Noo Kassel based phone provider "Ha' Waay?"

[Warmtoast]

As The Metro front page reports re the Gavin Williamson sacking
Go Huawei And Shut Up

[The Old Fat One]

One senior Conservative also points out a rich irony here, saying: "A government that governs by open leaking then sacks someone for not being open about their leaking. We have surely moved from the incompetent to the theatre of the absurd!"

The defence rests (no pun intended)

[Asturias56]

Williamson was always pro- Gavin Williamson and nothing more

the mad statements (eg sending the fleet to warn off China etc) every Monday morning to get his picture in the press, the dressing in military gear, again to get his picture in the press....

he was clearly the main suspect for the leak and he admits he had a telephone conversation with the Telegraph journalist who broke the story immediately after the meeting... what an idiot ........

Another useless UK career politician who can't tell the difference between his own career and the UK's interest........

Thank God he was nailed now before he could do serious damage.................

[FlightlessParrot]

I'm pretty sure that Huawei equipment in our network could be a risk to out National Security. The rest of the Five Eyes certainly think so!

The relevant NZ telecoms company wants to use Huawei for 5G (their stuff iss cheaper), but the Government was pretty clearly heavied by the USA into excluding them. I think the same for Australia. There was a report in the press that spooks had examined the Huawei software, and found no trap doors, but the whole thing was so old and crusty that it would be easy to hack (https://www.techspot.com/news/79404-huawei-reputation-receives-another-damaging-blow-uk-security.html).

I don't know, but it's not exactly unanimous spontaneous consent with the idea that Huawei is an arm of the Communist Party of the PRC, which is the US claim.

[Asturias56]

From May's letter...

"am therefore concerned by the manner in which you have engaged with this investigation.

It has been conducted fairly, with the full co-operation of other NSC attendees.

They have all answered questions, engaged properly, provided as much information as possible to assist with the investigation, and encouraged their staff to do the same. Your conduct has not been of the same standard as others.

In our meeting this evening, I put to you the latest information from the investigation, which provides compelling evidence suggesting your responsibility for the unauthorised disclosure.

No other credible version of events to explain this leak has been identified."

So presumably he DIDN'T answer all the questions, encourage his staff to help or provide info........ he wouldn't have stiffed him unless he was being slithery as hell I guess.......

[AR1]

...are you sure you aren't getting mixed up with the Noo Kassel based phone provider "Ha' Waay?"

No, their infrastructure is already in use throughout the UK in various operators. They have offices in the UK to support it.
As far as Williamson is concerned the sacking is (as far as I can see) a reaction to the leaking that some ministers were opposed to the inclusion of Huawei in the 5G rollout. Good. Im glad that there are people who challenge those decisions, but confidentiality is key. If he was that unhappy, and considered the risk high then he could have resigned and made the reasons public.

Most of us are not in a position to make well founded judgements on the risk of Huawei to our security. We, and Europe have been soft on this in the past; the promise of cheaper infrastructure has been enough to offset the risk (possibly with some other operational safeguards). The USA on the other hand, does what the USA always does. Handle it with paranoia doused with a hint of McArthyism - Witness the blocking of bids to aquire former us giant Motorola Networks. The big 'M' were strong wherever the USA had influence and as such a sucessful aquisition would have led to a land grab of infratructure within the US itself and elsewhere. It went to Nokia.

My own direct dealings with them, albeit some years ago led to them placing a limited order with the UK for technical samples for evaluation within thier infrastructure back in China. The board of the company blocked the sale as they felt it was a risk to our IP. If they'd have ordered 10k we might well have done it. - Risk vs Reward.

[Treble one]

Point of order ORAC-he was sacked for potentially being in breach of the OSA. Its not a great advertisment for his claims to be PM.

Can only think he forgot he was at the NSC and not a Cabinet meeting (if it was him).

[Chugalug2]

Point of order ORAC-he was sacked for potentially being in breach of the OSA.

Perhaps, or perhaps not. Lord O'Donnell (former Cabinet Secretary) reported on the BBC News Site as saying on the Today Programme :-

Lord O'Donnell stresses the leak was only a breach of the ministerial code, "not a breach of the Official Secrets Act that is putting people's lives at risk".


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-48131091

[Treble one]

Perhaps, or perhaps not. Lord O'Donnell (former Cabinet Secretary) reported on the BBC News Site as saying on the Today Programme :-




https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-48131091


Indeed Chugalug2. I'm sure the reason that the PM now considers this matter 'closed' despite the potential National Security implications, is that a police level investigation may not quite reveal the answer that she got to? Possibly hurried chats with The Met Chief, along the lines of 'don't worry Cressida, its sorted, nothing to see here...'

Of course, the opposition politicos won't let it lie and I believe there is an Urgent question in the HOC in a minute or two from the Tom Watson MP.

It will be interesting to see how this develops. The former SoS Defence knows where a lot of bodies lie and skeletons can be found in cupboards it seems...and he's not so amused at having his name associated with an act of treason. He may demand due process himself?

[Just This Once...]

Well this went off-script quickly!

As soon as Sir Mark Sedwill was appointed by the PM as the leak investigator it set in chain the usual business of removing Number 10, the Cabinet Office and the NSC chair as entities for suspicion or investigation. Quite handy when you know they leak as a matter of routine.

Sir Mark's list of suspects was now contained to the intelligence agencies themselves (highly unlikely and outside of his gift) so effectively he had to pick either the Home Sec or Defence Sec. Even if he wanted too, picking the Home Office would have triggered a Met Police investigation as they would have undoubted primacy.

As the PM knew, Sir Mark managed to pull a fast one on Gavin Williamson when he deleted the MoD from the Defence Review, chairing it himself as the NSC. When this started to unravel Williamson dug the knife into Sir Mark and a separate MoD orchestrated 'Defence Modernisation Review' was split away from the NSC chair. More dummies were spat.

But as the PM knew, the normal politics would kick-in: The Defence Secretary would be asked to resign and he would dutifully accept responsibility for an 'inadvertent error' and everyone would agree that it was all a big mistake with no real consequences and no need for the Met Police as everything has been resolved.

With Gavin Williamson issuing a flat denial and positively courting a police investigation it has all gone tits-up. The PM cannot claim that the matter is closed as, effectively, there is a counter claim that somebody else leaked the information and has managed to evade the first investigation - effectively a criminal matter. Equally, Williamson has surrendered the 'inadvertent error' political defence and is equally liable for a criminal investigation.

With so many senior politicians chalking this up as a major security breach it is difficult to see how the PM can avoid a police investigation. Nobody has admitted an error and nobody is accepting the blame.

[Jackonicko]

I couldn’t disagree more with Asturias’ opinion that Gavin Williamson was just: “Another useless UK career politician who can't tell the difference between his own career and the UK's interest.” I’d also argue with Racedo and Onceapilot, and would tend to agree with Nutloose and Proone.



One of the perks of being a defence journo is that one gets to meet many Defence Ministers and senior officers.



In some cases all one gets is an opportunity to ask the odd question within a huddle of politician/officer, minders, and hacks. In other cases one gets a hurried chat. Occasionally you get the chance for a longer sit down one-on-one chat. At the other end of the spectrum there are politicians you see and hear but can’t engage with - Geoff Hoon seemed very keen to avoid any contact with journalists at all!



A journo’s contact with any Defence Secretary is not enough to claim great insight or knowledge, but it can be enough to form an impression.



Since I started working in this field full time, there have been ten Tory Defence Secretaries and six Labour, plus countless junior Ministers. I’ve properly met about eight of them, and watched and questioned a few more.



John Reid struck me as being very in command of his brief, knowledgeable and professional, while the floor-crossing Quentin Davies was also incredibly knowledgeable about defence, and had great personal charm. They seemed to be ‘better friends to defence’ than some Tory Secretaries of State and Ministers.



Phil Hammond was an incredibly professional operator – so in command of his brief that he seemed relaxed and self confident even when dealing with the kind of really granular detail that I would not have expected him to know about. And he was another really charming and friendly, open and approachable chap.



It’s easy to sneer at Williamson – he didn’t seem to have that ‘Eton and Oxford polish’ that many senior politicians have (whether they went to those institutions or not), and seemed to have trouble with the digraph ‘th’, sometimes substituting an ‘f’ or ‘v’ which doesn’t matter, but which gives an impression of not being well educated. His well publicised howlers (telling the Russians to shut up and go away, etc.) were embarrassing, and his boyish enthusiasm could sometimes get in the way. At the F-35B/Centurion IOC announcement, for example, his insistence on speaking off the cuff, without notes, meant that he failed to actually announce anything, leading to an undignified scrabble to do so by senior officers and press minders after his speech. You never got the feeling that he had a surgically incisive brain, nor a particularly detailed command of every element of his brief.



But after speaking to him, I was left in no doubt as to his genuine enthusiasm for defence, his keenness to evangelise for it, and his willingness to fight tooth and nail to get his department every penny that it needed and to oppose the Treasury. He seemed to appreciate the extraordinary calibre of our servicemen, and even to be slightly in awe of them (something I share!), and he seemed to have a real appreciation of the many threats facing us.



There sometimes seems to be a tendency among senior officers and politicians to pursue the procurement of particular high profile, high tech weapons systems – almost as though they want their legacy to be ‘the CAS or Defence Secretary who got the RAF the Scruggs Wonderplane’ – while presiding over cuts to force structure. Williamson seemed to have a real understanding of the vital importance of mass – of the need for more bayonets, more ships and more squadrons.



He is clearly an ambitious young man, but he was the first Defence Secretary I’ve met who didn’t seem to view Defence as being merely a toe hold for a long ascent of the greasy pole, and the first who might have been willing to put the interests of his department ahead of career and self interest.



I’d be VERY surprised if Ms Mordaunt was anything like as pro-defence as Williamson, or as willing to fight its corner, and I therefore very much regret his removal.



Melchett pointed out an interesting tendency for Defence to be viewed as being a relatively unimportant brief, nowadays, citing Penny Morduant’s retention of her position as Minister for Women.



This is nothing new. Wasn’t George Robertson given Defence to make up for his disappointment of not getting Scotland?

[Melchett01]

I couldn’t disagree more with Asturias’ opinion that Gavin Williamson was just: “Another useless UK career politician who can't tell the difference between his own career and the UK's interest.” I’d also argue with Racedo and Onceapilot, and would tend to agree with Nutloose and Proone.

One of the perks of being a defence journo is that one gets to meet many Defence Ministers and senior officers.

In some cases all one gets is an opportunity to ask the odd question within a huddle of politician/officer, minders, and hacks. In other cases one gets a hurried chat. Occasionally you get the chance for a longer sit down one-on-one chat. At the other end of the spectrum there are politicians you see and hear but can’t engage with - Geoff Hoon seemed very keen to avoid any contact with journalists at all!

A journo’s contact with any Defence Secretary is not enough to claim great insight or knowledge, but it can be enough to form an impression.

Since I started working in this field full time, there have been ten Tory Defence Secretaries and six Labour, plus countless junior Ministers. I’ve properly met about eight of them, and watched and questioned a few more.

John Reid struck me as being very in command of his brief, knowledgeable and professional, while the floor-crossing Quentin Davies was also incredibly knowledgeable about defence, and had great personal charm. They seemed to be ‘better friends to defence’ than some Tory Secretaries of State and Ministers.

Phil Hammond was an incredibly professional operator – so in command of his brief that he seemed relaxed and self confident even when dealing with the kind of really granular detail that I would not have expected him to know about. And he was another really charming and friendly, open and approachable chap.

It’s easy to sneer at Williamson – he didn’t seem to have that ‘Eton and Oxford polish’ that many senior politicians have (whether they went to those institutions or not), and seemed to have trouble with the digraph ‘th’, sometimes substituting an ‘f’ or ‘v’ which doesn’t matter, but which gives an impression of not being well educated. His well publicised howlers (telling the Russians to shut up and go away, etc.) were embarrassing, and his boyish enthusiasm could sometimes get in the way. At the F-35B/Centurion IOC announcement, for example, his insistence on speaking off the cuff, without notes, meant that he failed to actually announce anything, leading to an undignified scrabble to do so by senior officers and press minders after his speech. You never got the feeling that he had a surgically incisive brain, nor a particularly detailed command of every element of his brief.

But after speaking to him, I was left in no doubt as to his genuine enthusiasm for defence, his keenness to evangelise for it, and his willingness to fight tooth and nail to get his department every penny that it needed and to oppose the Treasury. He seemed to appreciate the extraordinary calibre of our servicemen, and even to be slightly in awe of them (something I share!), and he seemed to have a real appreciation of the many threats facing us.

There sometimes seems to be a tendency among senior officers and politicians to pursue the procurement of particular high profile, high tech weapons systems – almost as though they want their legacy to be ‘the CAS or Defence Secretary who got the RAF the Scruggs Wonderplane’ – while presiding over cuts to force structure. Williamson seemed to have a real understanding of the vital importance of mass – of the need for more bayonets, more ships and more squadrons.

He is clearly an ambitious young man, but he was the first Defence Secretary I’ve met who didn’t seem to view Defence as being merely a toe hold for a long ascent of the greasy pole, and the first who might have been willing to put the interests of his department ahead of career and self interest.

I’d be VERY surprised if Ms Mordaunt was anything like as pro-defence as Williamson, or as willing to fight its corner, and I therefore very much regret his removal.

Melchett pointed out an interesting tendency for Defence to be viewed as being a relatively unimportant brief, nowadays, citing Penny Morduant’s retention of her position as Minister for Women.

This is nothing new. Wasn’t George Robertson given Defence to make up for his disappointment of not getting Scotland?

I was thrinking more of Des Browne who was double-hatted as Defence and Scottish Secs, which I recall at the time caused a not inconsiderable degree of angst that Gordon Brown was doing Defence on the cheap once again. Regardless of what one thinks of Williamson as the SoS - I would go for very pro, almost to the extent of over extending and commiting to prove a point - this isn’t over by a long shot. I think Williamson’s removal is very politically convenient; it enables Sedwill to get his revenge and also to present the Chinese with a head on a platter - the head causing so many ‘issues’ - so we can move forward economically with the Golden Era.

But the odds are shortening on a formal investigation and as the former Chief Whip he knows where the skeletons are. And the rmore Number 10 refuses to refer the issue to the Met for formal investigation, the more likely people are to believe that there is something to hide which they know professional investigators could well uncover.

[Bob Viking]

An excellent post but I’m afraid I must reprimand you for a severe breech of Pprune RoE.

Why would you bring actual experience based on personal encounters to a conversation that is clearly better served by supposition and hearsay?

I expected better from you.

BV
😉

[NutLoose]

As the police appear to be content to let the matter lie unless a complaint is made, if he is squeaky clean over this he could bring it to the police himself, that would put the cat amongst the pigeons.

[Asturias56]

"One of the perks of being a defence journo is that one gets to meet many Defence Ministers and senior officers."

well of course you like him - he generated a lot of copy.......

[AnglianAV8R]

In Defence of Gavin Williamson?s Right to Defend Himself (http://www.theblogmire.com/in-defence-of-gavin-williamsons-right-to-defend-himself/)

[Harley Quinn]

Did he do it or didn't he? I have no idea but I am more concerned over what information is now going to be withheld by the international intelligence community, the rest of the 'five eyes'.

Can't you just imagine the scene;

"Gee Mr President we have hard evidence of a dirty device in London, England. We think they're going to detonate it on New Year's Eve. We should really tell those guys in MI5."

"How did we get this Intel?" asks America's first female president.

"From our special source" comes the answer.

"No way am I endangering our source on those stupid, untrustworthy limeys, ever, period. Now get uncle Vladimir on the phone."

[Onceapilot]

I couldn’t disagree more with Asturias’ opinion that Gavin Williamson was just: “Another useless UK career politician who can't tell the difference between his own career and the UK's interest.” I’d also argue with Racedo and Onceapilot, and would tend to agree with Nutloose and Proone.



Pity you mulled it over until lunchtime THE NEXT DAY to post, instead of within about 1 hour of the event! :=

As for the value of a journos opinion in this...similar to mine! :ok:

In my time, I met quite a few Pollies, inc PM's and Defence Ministers. I was never impressed! :oh:

OAP

[Lima Juliet]

Stupid boy...


https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1200x762/image_3d49953850599ac5152d64e7ee66cb7091d7aa4d.jpeg

[Blossy]

Just shows how powerful political cartoons can be!

[baffman]

Perhaps, or perhaps not. Lord O'Donnell (former Cabinet Secretary) reported on the BBC News Site as saying on the Today Programme :-

Lord O'Donnell stresses the leak was only a breach of the ministerial code, "not a breach of the Official Secrets Act that is putting people's lives at risk".

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-48131091
The test for a breach of the Official Secrets Act is not, however, "putting people's lives at risk" but making "damaging" disclosure.

[Melchett01]

The test for a breach of the Official Secrets Act is not, however, "putting people's lives at risk" but making "damaging" disclosure.

Loss of life and injury is covered as part of the definition of a damaging disclosure
(2)For the purposes of subsection (1) above a disclosure is damaging if—

(a)it damages the capability of, or of any part of, the armed forces of the Crown to carry out their tasks or leads to loss of life or injury to members of those forces or serious damage to the equipment or installations of those forces; or

(b)otherwise than as mentioned in paragraph (a) above, it endangers the interests of the United Kingdom abroad, seriously obstructs the promotion or protection by the United Kingdom of those interests or endangers the safety of British citizens abroad; or

(c)it is of information or of a document or article which is such that its unauthorised disclosure would be likely to have any of those effects.

There are other details in the MOD's own JSP on security, but as that hasn't been released onto Gov.UK, I don't intend to have my own breach by going into them here! All that said, the press reports suggest that even the Cabinet Secretary has admitted he didn't breach the OSA, so it would appear that there is no criminal case to answer. In which case, where is the smoking gun? Looking more and more like a sacking of political convenience. I doubt he will be suing for wrongful dismissal, but this could well have the making of May's own Watergate if it runs.

[Cornish Jack]

Previous contributors may or may not have valid views/comments on this episode but, for me, most interesting was the Deputy PM's Urgent Statement and his responses to questions in the HofC. Most particularly his insistence that the lack of intent to prosecute was "because this was a matter of principle". That reply will have been witten into Hansard and, as such, will constitute 'precedence'. "So what?", you may say. It means that, theoretically, any future similar conduct which could be similarly defined, would also be WITHOUT threat of retribution. So, just which matters of national importance and security can be classified as 'matters of principle'? ... and politicians having principles might furrow a brow or two!!:yuk:

[Phantom Driver]

All this noise about -"show us the evidence " ; bottom line is . PM can appoint/sack whoever he/she likes . It was her choice . However , the implications of such action further down the road is another matter .
Methinks Private Pike doth complaineth too much for one with a lot of form in these areas . As for "swearing on the lives of my children", or " I made her (May) so I can break her " ; no further comment......
(p,s don't let me start on arming milk floats or pedalos from Cleethorpes )

[NutLoose]

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/gavin-williamson-sacked-defence-secretary-to-receive-%c2%a317000-pay-off-despite-huawei-leak-scandal/ar-AAANwcn

[Lyneham Lad]

Extract from a column in today's The Times (https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/good-riddance-to-gavin-williamson-m33frl9wg?shareToken=1d4c79416f5de0dd240dee283910aab0) by Max Hastings:-


Defence chiefs assemble today in Westminster Abbey for what some people think a bizarre occasion. Clergy will confer a blessing on 50 years of the Royal Navy’s submarine nuclear deterrent. Yet the brass now has a pleasing opportunity to rebrand the service as a thanksgiving for delivery from Gavin Williamson. Nobody will mind getting down on their knees for that.

The sacked defence secretary inspired heroic disdain among those obliged to work with him, ministers and public servants alike. He represented a mismatch between ambition and ability that seemed striking even by the standards of this government.

Williamson believed he could use his office as a stepping stone to the premiership. He advanced personal initiatives — for instance, to restore Britain’s “out of area” capabilities, projecting power far afield — which exasperated both Downing Street and service chiefs. His personal behaviour was crass: he scrawled an obscenity about Theresa May on a written rebuke from her office, which shocked his own staff as much as it will startle historians when eventually they get the chance to read it.

I know no one in the defence and political loop who is not confident of Williamson’s culpability for the leak from the National Security Council which cost him his job. Indeed, their anger focuses upon the prime minister’s refusal to trigger a criminal investigation into a breach of the Official Secrets Act for which he might be convicted by a court.

Clearly not a fan...

[Krystal n chips]

This may also suggest a less than illustrious tenure.....but, as C4 News suggested, he can now spend more time with his puppies...which is a comforting thought really.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/11/gavin-williamson-enhances-reputation-for-haplessness

[A_Van]

Agreed also.

I blame the Russians. ... .

And why not the Chinese? This guy seemed to be an outstanding seller of the Chinese ceramic tableware :-) So, by quitting this business he made a great damage to the Chinese economy. Having him back should have been a dream of manufacturers of this crap :-)

[AnglianAV8R]

https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/480x309/hillary_and_the_ruskies_cc26f345c2213b59239c5d84824f3fb69a62 8244.jpg

[langleybaston]

Previous contributors may or may not have valid views/comments on this episode but, for me, most interesting was the Deputy PM's Urgent Statement and his responses to questions in the HofC. Most particularly his insistence that the lack of intent to prosecute was "because this was a matter of principle". That reply will have been witten into Hansard and, as such, will constitute 'precedence'. "So what?", you may say. It means that, theoretically, any future similar conduct which could be similarly defined, would also be WITHOUT threat of retribution. So, just which matters of national importance and security can be classified as 'matters of principle'? ... and politicians having principles might furrow a brow or two!!:yuk:

"precedent" I think.
"precedence" is as in "first among equals" like a WO SWO among WOs on his RAF station/base or whatever.

[Lima Juliet]

What kind of sicko keeps a bird eating spider in the Houses of Parliament? Oh yes, Private Pike...

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/the-sudden-rise-and-fall-of-private-pike-gavin-williamson-and-his-pet-tarantula-mhpllgpw8

[langleybaston]

What kind of a sicko keeps saying "Clearly the people want us to get my deal across the line"?

[Jackonicko]

I rarely find myself agreeing with Jacob Rees Mogg, but his tweet:

"The security issue is not who leaked but Huawei." seems to be on the money.

He subsequently said the same on LBC. "A leak from a meeting of the national Security Council is 'trivial' compared to the risk of letting Huawei get a foothold in the UK telecoms industry."

[AnglianAV8R]

"A leak from a meeting of the national Security Council is 'trivial' compared to the risk of letting Huawei get a foothold in the UK telecoms industry."

This exposes our weakness.... What telecoms industry ?

[Lima Juliet]

What kind of a sicko keeps saying "Clearly the people want us to get my deal across the line"?

Eh??? :confused:

[oldmansquipper]

Some nice "whooshes" on this thread, chaps. Keep em going!

[ZH875]

https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/960x539/fb_img_1556966747609_a9cf94990bb54feb15ea8bec59941f25b848eac 9.jpg

[racedo]

"No way am I endangering our source on those stupid, untrustworthy limeys, ever, period. Now get uncle Vladimir on the phone."

Is this the same Russians who have quite openly helped US/UK in Afghanistan.

[Asturias56]

Well I guess you can either let in the Chinese - who MIGHT have back-doors in their kit or the Yanks & Israelis who definitely do...................

[Harley Quinn]

Is this the same Russians who have quite openly helped US/UK in Afghanistan.

Read it as you wish, the point really was that the intelligence community are likely to be far more reticent about passing intelligence to the UK.

[Arcanum]

Well I guess you can either let in the Chinese - who MIGHT have back-doors in their kit or the Yanks & Israelis who definitely do...................

Which of Huawei, Ericsson, Nokia and Samsung are US or Israeli companies? They are the only credible 5G infrastructure companies (and ZTE is the only other company building 5G equipment) and Huawei are one of the most advanced.

He subsequently said the same on LBC. "A leak from a meeting of the national Security Council is 'trivial' compared to the risk of letting Huawei get a foothold in the UK telecoms industry."

Huawei are already in the UK phone network. That ship sailed years ago.

[Asturias56]

I agree - far far to late to be worried

Re Williamson the Torygraph didn't come out and say "Honest - it wasn't him - it was someone else.." He clearly has little support in Cabinet and with luck will now fade from the scene

Threatening to "tell people were the bodies are buried" to get his own back just shows what sort of guy he is

[wiggy]

I rarely find myself agreeing with Jacob Rees Mogg, but his tweet:

"The security issue is not who leaked but Huawei." seems to be on the money.

He subsequently said the same on LBC. "A leak from a meeting of the national Security Council is 'trivial' compared to the risk of letting Huawei get a foothold in the UK telecoms industry."

IMHO the leak itself is very much a security issue and isn't trivial...I would have thought if the contents of NSC meetings are going to be leaked within minutes by Ministers of State then I wonder if some of our allies might become less keen on sharing info with us, and maybe our own domestic agencies might be less likely to present information to Ministers...

[Asturias56]

It's the last point that's important - who is going to tell politicians anything important if they are going to call the media immediately afterwards?

It'll be back to the bad old days of the Govt not admitting there WAS a UK Secret Service - which is not good......

[ORAC]

The Times:

”........The Sunday Times has been passed a National Security Council document showing that Williamson was determined to send British troops into action in Africa. He ordered military chiefs to draw up plans for intervention by the armed forces in at least five African countries, including Zimbabwe, Nigeria, Kenya and Egypt.

The paper was designed to support May’s Africa strategy of promoting peacekeeping and the protection of wild animals. However, Ministry of Defence officials say Williamson’s approach was to “find excuses to send troops”. “He wanted to invade Africa,” a military source said. “He made it clear that he was keen to send the troops in.”

A friend of Williamson responded: “It’s ironic that an NSC document has been leaked in an attempt to discredit Gavin.”........

[Onceapilot]

It is interesting. I did expect that Williamson would actually swing the axe when he was moved to the MOD. I did hope that he might at least rationalise the more outrageous expeditionary ideas of some and, instead, concentrate on reinforcing the depth of defence capability.
Disappointingly, it seems he might have been carving-out his own foreign policy? Where is the, forward looking, with capability in depth and effective, Defence review? :oh:

OAP

[Pontius Navigator]

Melchet, you mentioned Des.

The one thing I remember of him was his H&S policy, a policy to be displayed on notice boards. It ran to something like 8 pages of A4. Like War & Peace I doubt anyone read it, but like the lawyer he was, he covered his Ace.

[AnglianAV8R]

Read it as you wish, the point really was that the intelligence community are likely to be far more reticent about passing intelligence to the UK.

Might the UK, in turn, be tempted to close Menwith Hill in response to such reticence.

[rab-k]

Sign of things to come?

Global post-Brexit Britain desperate for trade deals at the mercy of those on the other side of the table? In this instance...

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/chancellor-china-trade-visit-gavin-williamson-aircraft-carrier-pacific-a8782211.html

...the Chinese threw their toys out the pram thanks to Williamson and his "gun boat" diplomacy.

Did they demand his removal from post and insist Huawei be given the green light as a precondition to (resuming) trade talks?

Watch this space...

[Melchett01]

... A friend of Williamson responded: “It’s ironic that an NSC document has been leaked in an attempt to discredit Gavin.”........

Especially given that such documents will invariably carry a security classification, and therefore, the leaker could quite easily be prosecuted under the OSA. Politicians eh?!

[Melchett01]

Melchet, you mentioned Des.

The one thing I remember of him was his H&S policy, a policy to be displayed on notice boards. It ran to something like 8 pages of A4. Like War & Peace I doubt anyone read it, but like the lawyer he was, he covered his Ace.

PN - I know we certainly didn't read it! And not exactly environmentally friendly as a result.

[BVRAAM]

If he actually did do what he was accused of, then he was removed for doing the right thing.
I don't take revealing classified information lightly - it's obviously extremely serious and potentially life-threatening, but on this very rare occasion I think it was the lesser of two evils and the repercussions of letting it go ahead were unthinkable. Our relationship with the USA is far more valuable to me than cheap sh*t from China.

[Out Of Trim]

Seeing as the UK Telecom networks already incorporate Huawei kit on the 3G and 4G nets. Why is the future 5G technology suddenly a problem? Unless something dodgy has been found in their equipment!

If so; then it would be foolish for us to install it.

[redsetter]

Seeing as the UK Telecom networks already incorporate Huawei kit on the 3G and 4G nets. Why is the future 5G technology suddenly a problem? Unless something dodgy has been found in their equipment!

If so; then it would be foolish for us to install it.

5G provides the capability to connect a lot more things, some of which may be critical infrastructure. And BT is removing Huawei kit from (the core at least) of existing networks.

[rab-k]

@ #79, #80, #81...

So, wherein lies the quid pro quo?

Chinese tech giant gets access to UK tech infrastructure - despite misgivings of allies.

UK Govt. gets what in return? (Other than a new SoS for Defence).

​​​​

[redsetter]

I can't see any quid pro quo of allowing Huawei into our networks.

Take a look at at the HCSEC report on Huawei:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/790270/HCSEC_OversightBoardReport-2019.pdf

[BEagle]

Hmm, I see that my excellent Vodafone MiFi device is, in fact, made by Huawei...:\

Should I be worried that Wun Hung Lo or some other PRC spook is reading my e-mails if I use MiFi?

I don't think so....

[Asturias56]

The UK gets a decent 5G Network and gets rid of the odious Williamson

Win-Win situation...................

[racedo]

The UK gets a decent 5G Network and gets rid of the odious Williamson

Win-Win situation...................

:ok::D

and Snow White and 7 Dwarfs, Goofy and Pluto (needed 10 characters)

[Onceapilot]

Hmm, I see that my excellent Vodafone MiFi device is, in fact, made by Huawei...:\

Should I be worried that Wun Hung Lo or some other PRC spook is reading my e-mails if I use MiFi?

I don't think so....

Beagle. You are so wrong to belittle the risks of future damage to any country through weaknesses in electronic security. I do not know how such security can possibly be guaranteed as we accelerate towards AI Armageddon but, giving a totalitarian regime a front seat in the infrastructure of a major upgrade of a UK wide net seems like a risk to me! :ouch:

OAP

[redsetter]

The UK gets a decent 5G Network ...................

Maybe. Although, if you read the HCSEC report you'll see that amongst their major concerns are: "the underlying defects in Huawei’s software engineering and cyber security processes". So what you may get is a 5G network, connecting all sorts of strategic national infrastructure, that may be exploitable not only by the Chinese, but by a variety of other actors as well. I understand the Iranians are quite big in cyber warfare ...

[racedo]

t, giving a totalitarian regime a front seat in the infrastructure of a major upgrade of a UK wide net seems like a risk to me! :ouch:

OAP

You seem to assume that Allies now will never change.

[Hipper]

https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/960x539/fb_img_1556966747609_a9cf94990bb54feb15ea8bec59941f25b848eac 9.jpg

'All three of them'.

[Asturias56]

:ok:

poor woman - she'll never live that day down........................

[Buster15]

If he actually did do what he was accused of, then he was removed for doing the right thing.
I don't take revealing classified information lightly - it's obviously extremely serious and potentially life-threatening, but on this very rare occasion I think it was the lesser of two evils and the repercussions of letting it go ahead were unthinkable. Our relationship with the USA is far more valuable to me than cheap sh*t from China.

My understanding is that the accusation was based upon an 11 minute call he had with a journalist after the meeting.
If he is so sure that it was not him who leaked the story then why has the phone call not been used as evidence.
Or have I missed something.

[Asturias56]

Indeed - and the Torygraph hasn't said "no! You have the wrong man!!"

You don't leak from a security forum - simple - and as Minister for Defence it defies description that he could be so dumb

As for always cuddling up to the Americans I thought the reason the UK wanted to BREXIT was to avoid being dictated to by a large collection of foreigners over the water................... personally I reckon the NSA & GCHQ as far more likely to be tapping my phone that the Chinese........

[Asturias56]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-48262681

Hackers were able to remotely install surveillance software on phones and other devices using a major vulnerability in messaging app WhatsApp, it has been confirmed. WhatsApp, which is owned by Facebook, said the attack targeted a "select number" of users and was orchestrated by "an advanced cyber-actor". A fix was rolled out on Friday.

On Monday, WhatsApp urged all of its 1.5 billion users to update their apps as an added precaution.

The surveillance software involved was developed by Israeli firm NSO Group (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-37192670), according to a report in the Financial Times (https://www.ft.com/content/4da1117e-756c-11e9-be7d-6d846537acab).

-------------

We all use quite a bit of Israeli electronics in the defence business don't we................

[dead_pan]

They'll never hack my carrier pigeon and unbreakable Beano letter substitution cypher! Old skool is best.

[falcon900]

Whilst cyber security threats abound, and inevitably will continue to do so, what makes the potential threat from Huawei more serious is that their equipment and software could end up embedded in our communications infrastructure. As has been inferred already ,If someone hacks into whats app, facebook or whatever social media platforms it can be embarrassing and inconvenient, but rarely fatal.
If the underlying communication network is violated, or can be turned off to order, it represents a much higher order threat. Forget about social media, worry about industrial and commercial infrastructure which relies on the internet to function. Not to mention military......
Integrity of our communication network is a big deal, and even a cursory glance at the HCSEC report referenced a few posts ago would suggest that all is not well with Huawei. All the more surprising that we seem to be able conclude that it is ok to continue with Huawei. They do seem to splash their cash around though..........

[SATCOS WHIPPING BOY]

I see Huawei have promised not to steal secrets from us and pass them to the Chinese. Theresa has said she will send them a form to sign to this effect.

They replied saying not to bother as they downloaded one from her computer last week.

[BEagle]

dead pan wrote: They'll never hack my carrier pigeon and unbreakable Beano letter substitution cypher! Old skool is best.

Back in the '50s, the I-Spy Secret Code Book from Big Chief I-Spy was always the best!

6d I-Spy books were the way one's parents kept one from getting bored whilst trundling along on long journeys in the family Zephyr - whereas nowadays the little beggars seem to need £300 worth of iPad to keep them occupied....

[Chugalug2]

falcon900:-
All the more surprising that we seem to be able conclude that it is ok to continue with Huawei. They do seem to splash their cash around though..........

I've probably got the wrong end of the stick, but are you suggesting that Huawei are getting the UK 5g business by straightforward bribery? If so, who are they bribing, the NSC?

[falcon900]

Chug,
Nothing so vulgar, try this for a clue https://www.channelweb.co.uk/crn-uk/news/3071462/huawei-boss-we-will-shift-our-us-investment-to-the-uk

[Chugalug2]

Ah, thanks for that, falcon. Are they throwing in a mess of pottage as well? Seems right up this Government's street. The words nothing, value, and price come to mind.

[falcon900]

Chug,
I am reminded of a well known saying about the lunatics taking over the asylum, currently being used on another thread.

To recap, the concerns regarding Huawei were so great that we, uniquely for them, required the establishment of an "independent" oversight body (HCSEC) to review their products and software for threats. This body is funded by Huawei. So large is the scope of its activity that it has already outgrown its original premises.
Its findings have, amongst other things, repeatedly confirmed the existence of serious problems and threats. Its most recent report, referred to earlier, confirms that the issues continue, and that Huawei is nether making progress in resolving them nor cleaning up its act. Pretty much the rest of the western world has turned its back on them.

Perfect backdrop then for wrapping them in to our 5G and general communications networks!

[falcon900]

PS I am no fan of G. Williamson, and do not condone any leaking.

[Chugalug2]

PS I am no fan of G. Williamson, and do not condone any leaking.

Which, of course, he continues to deny. Not withstanding the seriousness of such a leak, without it the Huawei 5G security issue would never have come to light. The company itself is a security risk it would seem, why else would the unique formation of HCSEC have been seen as necessary? That it is wholly owned by Huawei speaks volumes. The ultimate example of contracting out government work. What next, the prisons being run by ex-cons?

The latest (year five) annual report can again be found here:-

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/790270/HCSEC_OversightBoardReport-2019.pdf

Thank you falcon for the info.