BEIS0000917
BEIS0000917
From: Permanent Secretaries ia
Sent: Friday, January 6, 2023 2:29 PM
To: Bickerton, David (Business Sectors DG Office)
Directorate) I; Brooks-White (Jobshare}
Arasaratnam, Roshana - UKGI
I; Brightwell, Rob (Business Sectors - Services Directorate)
Cc: Permanent Secretaries
Subject: RE: [Briefing Request - midday Friday 23/12] RE: Attached Letter from Henry Staunton,
Chairman
Hil all,
Sarah met with Henry yesterday — thanks very much for the support on briefing. It was a fairly
frank/open convo in general, I should flag that Sarah opted not to write to Henry prior to the
meeting. Readout below, left longer as I think useful:
Thanks,
Henry Staunton (HS) intro with Sarah Munby (SM)
Henry noted he has never seen a corporation challenged on so many fronts (eg the network, parcel
biz etc), don’t have luxury of prioritisation as every issue is a big one.
SM agreed that challenge is significant and that politics around POL make this an even trickier
problem to solve, the timing of agreeing a longer term solution this year is also very difficult
politically. Noted that we do need to be ready for what that answer is though.
SM flagged that the relationship on funding w/HMT is difficult, their view will always lean towards
the ‘begging bowl' type scenario, a dynamic worsened by horizon/inquiry costs.
HS/SM agreed to having frank/open relationship on POL
SM gave background to SoS ways of working - noting fairly hard/pushy with ALBs/Partner Orgs.
BEIS0000917
BEIS0000917
Succession/Mgmt
e SM SoS knows problems with internal succession and that mgmt team isnt as strong as
could be so will likely raise this as challenge to fix
* HS noted also risks of bringing in new appts/firing people given precarious situ. But agree
need to strengthen as does NR.
¢__HS/NR discussing in coming weeks w/HR director plans to strengthen where they can
e SM acknowledged combo of relatively restrained pay plus challenging role
e HSnon exec strength also isnt good, often better people don’t stick around
SM ran through what we our doing our side to think about policy options and £. Noted 3 difficulties
on€:
1. We don’t have it (will need to come from elsewhere)
2. In order to give any money it will need to be approved by HMT - who wont allow us to give
until we have long term plan, but the timing doesn’t work - so trying to do something to
bridge
3. Subsidy control - without an excuse we cant just lift cash over the wall - have to be subsidy
compliant (but should be fixable and is our problem to fix)
SM We might end up doing something small to buy space to collectively to get to the longer term.
SM/HS discussed political dynamics of policy options - eg difficulties in reducing networks.
HS mentioned targets ref in inquiry hearing - wasn’t looking for apology but wider point around
being synced up and acknowledging where each others roles lie. Was keen him and Sarah
strategically aligned where poss
SM also keen to be aligned as far as poss, though reflected that level of trust in POL board/mgmt isnt
that high and that funding will come with conditions/scrutiny (how hmt work) but agree with
everyone playing in correct lane