The video offers insights into the unexpected political development surrounding the Intelligence and Security Committee in the UK. A last-minute political maneuver led to the appointment of Julian Lewis as chair, defying anticipated plans by the ruling party to instate Chris Grayling. This shift holds significance because it could affect the publication of the much-anticipated Russia report, which has been subject to delay and political intrigue for several months.

The discussion traverses the dramatic events that enabled Julian Lewis's election with support from opposition members and the ensuing tensions within the Conservative party. The video highlights the loss of guaranteed majority for the government on the committee, potentially impacting the decision on when and how the Russia report will be released. It also examines contrasting viewpoints about the committee's integrity and operational independence from government pressures.

Main takeaways from the video:

Please remember to turn on the CC button to view the subtitles.

Key Vocabularies and Common Phrases:

1. minutiae [mɪˈnuːʃiˌaɪ] - (noun) - Small and precise details typically considered tedious or trifling. - Synonyms: (details, niceties, specifics)

A plot that owes more to a Westminster box set than the minutiae of a nine person ballot.

2. coup [kuː] - (noun) - A sudden, decisive, and often illegal or forceful takeover of power. - Synonyms: (overthrow, putsch, rebellion)

But tonight, after what's been described as a last minute coup, opposition members of the intelligence and security committee have installed their man as chair.

3. confounding [kənˈfaʊndɪŋ] - (verb) - Causing surprise or confusion by acting against expectations. - Synonyms: (bewildering, perplexing, baffling)

...opposition members of the intelligence and security committee have installed their man as chair, confounding no Ten's plans...

4. clandestine [klænˈdɛstɪn] - (adjective) - Kept secret or done secretively, especially because illicit. - Synonyms: (secret, covert, furtive)

Well, it's a case of House of cards meets. Freddie Forsyth with meeting clandestine meetings in the corridors of Westminster.

5. egregious [ɪˈɡriːdʒəs] - (adjective) - Outstandingly bad; shocking. - Synonyms: (outrageous, appalling, atrocious)

Well, I'm saying egregious. I think what I'm saying is that the whip should never have asked him that question.

6. veto [ˈviːtoʊ] - (verb / noun) - To reject or prohibit a decision or proposal; the act of doing so. - Synonyms: (reject, prohibit, refuse)

...Ultimately, the prime minister has a considerable exercise of veto on this committee...

7. redaction [rɪˈdækʃən] - (noun) - The process of editing text for publication, often involving censorship or obscuring sensitive information. - Synonyms: (editing, censorship, obscuring)

We had it ready by early 2019, but it had to go through a redaction process

8. machinations [ˌmækɪˈneɪʃənz] - (noun) - Scheming or crafty actions intended to accomplish some usually evil end. - Synonyms: (plots, schemes, intrigues)

Why would you go through the machinations of trying to install Chris Grayling?

9. incoherent [ˌɪnkoʊˈhɪrənt] - (adjective) - Not logically connected or expressed in an unclear or confusing way. - Synonyms: (incomprehensible, unclear, disorganized)

It insists to me of an incoherent approach from number ten, Downing street, which I simply cannot fathom.

10. disinformation [ˌdɪsɪnfərˈmeɪʃən] - (noun) - False information spread deliberately to deceive. - Synonyms: (misinformation, falsehoods, deceit)

We now see disinformation campaigns, we now see cyberattacks, we now see data theft, copying of intellectual property.

The Russia report, Number 10 and 'fury' in the Conservative Party - BBC Newsnight

A plot that owes more to a Westminster box set than the minutiae of a nine person ballot. But tonight, after what's been described as a last minute coup, opposition members of the intelligence and security committee have installed their man as chair, confounding no Ten's plans to cement former transport secretary Chris Grayling in place. He was beaten by the independent minded conservative MP Julian Lewis, who's now found himself on the wrong side of his party. Why does all this matter? Because the government no longer has a guaranteed majority on that committee, meaning number 10 may lose control of the publication of the long awaited and much anticipated Russia report. As a longstanding critic of Russia, Julian Lewis may be keen to get it out. And newsnights learned we could see the report made public as soon as next week.

A day of high drama, then. And our political editor, Nick Watt, with me here. Nick, talk us through what happened. Well, it's a case of House of cards meets. Freddie Forsyth with meeting clandestine meetings in the corridors of Westminster. So in the last few days, some Labour figures went to Julian Lewis and said, would you like to be chairman? Because if you would like to be, we can guarantee that there will be the votes for you, because all the opposition members of that committee will vote for you. That was agreed. And they all kept quiet. One labor figure said to me, they joked to me, we basically kept Julian Lewis under house arrest for 48 hours. So when Julian Lewis went for the security clearance that you have to have for this committee, he went there this afternoon, he said he would like to stand for chairman of the committee. And the first that Chris Greylee knew of this was when the clerk of the committee said that there were two candidates for the election. And the first that Chris Greylee knew that it was Julian Lewis was when he saw his name on the ballot paper.

Now, there is absolute fury on the Tory side tonight, and as you say, Julian Lewis has had the whip, the conservative whip, removed from him. A senior Tory source is saying Julian Lewis had actually seen the chief whip, Mark Spencer, and said he would support Chris Grayling as chairman. He then colluded, they say, with Labour to install himself and did not tell the chief whip. And they say that is showing deep disrespect to the chief whip and to his staff. Now, tonight, we've also had a bit of a fight back from the Grayling camp and friends are telling me that he never thought that the job was in the bag. And it is completely wrong to say that he was a placeman of number ten and Dominic Cummings, because he had not exactly the warmest of relations with Dominic Cummings when they were on the same side in the Brexit campaign.

Nick, the bigger question to all this is where it leaves the publication of the Russia report. What are you hearing? Well, as you were saying, Emily, this means that the government no longer has a guaranteed majority on this committee. And labor is confident that Julian Lewis will support the publication of that report next week, possibly on Wednesday. Now, they believe that without Julian Lewis as chair, there was no guarantee of when and how this report would be published. Now, Downing street has consistently recently said there's a very simple reason for why this report has been delayed, which was that the committee had to be collapsed for the general election. And they also say the report, when you see it, it's going to be underwhelming. But one source familiar with that report told me there is enough in the report to cause trouble for the conservative party.

Nick, thanks very much indeed. Well, joining us now, Dominic Greave, the former security committee chair and chairman of the defense select committee, Tobias Elwood. I'm going to start, if I can, with you. Tobias, your response to what you've seen tonight. Well, many of us were keen to get this committee in place. It provides a unique and critical function with oversight of our clandestine agencies. And effective scrutiny is not as good for democracy. It actually helps raise the bar to make sure we make the right decisions. And we're expecting repercussions from China. Cyber attacks are on the rise. It's important this committee is able to function. I don't think anyone's questioning that the running of the committee today, but what we've seen is what looked like a very silent sort of coup by opposition members. We've heard that the whip has now been removed from Julian Lewis. It looks like a setback for the government. I'm just asking for your comment on the drama that we've seen tonight.

Quite frankly, I think it's been unfortunate. I absolutely want to focus on getting the job done. You spoke about the Russia report. I'm not sure there's any more that we can learn. Now, this report is quite old now we're seeing Russia ever closer with China, it's ever more raising the number of attacks. Julian Lewis, I'm just Andrew Mitchell told Times Radio this evening. Number ten have been extremely heavy handed. The lack of respect they've shown parliament has done them no good. So I'm trying to work out whether you sympathize with the chief whip, who feels that he was not told the truth earlier, or whether you sympathise with Julian Lewis, who's a. A former chair of the defense committee, your predecessor. He's a big champion for leave. He's been an MP for 25 years. What would you. Would you be coming out to defend him? Should others in the party take a stance? Or do you think he had what he deserves?

Well, I'm just learning the facts, as you are. He's a highly respected member of parliament. He's my predecessor on the defense select committee. He has a lot of relevance, experience, there's no doubt about it. But ultimately, he did work with labor, which is against our rules, and quite rightly, that's going to upset the chief whip. But much as we have this drama today, my wider concern, genuine concern, is because of the cyber threats that we face. The fact that we need to scrutinize the work of our clandestine agencies. We need to get back to work. And that's what I hope we can now do. Let me turn to Dominic Greave. What does this episode tell you?

What it tells me is that the government simply doesn't understand what the intelligence and security committee is there to do. This is a non partisan committee and I think I'm right in saying it has never ever had a vote in its history. It proceeds by consensus. If you were to attend its meetings, obviously they take place in secret. You wouldn't know who's a member of which political party. So the idea that there's something wrong in Julian Lewis getting support from Labour or Snpdeze MP's to become the chair cannot be right, because that is to politicise it in a party political way. Whereas the statute which sets this committee up makes quite clear that it is for the committee members at their first meeting to elect their chair, it doesn't say the party that is biggest will get the chairmanship. Indeed, in the past, even with nominated chairs, there have been times when it's been an opposition MP who has been the chair of the committee when a government of another party is in power.

So what troubles me about this episode, quite apart from its utter absurdity and now withdrawing the whip from Julian, who is indeed highly respected, is the mindset it gives about what on earth is going on in Downing street. Why did they try to manipulate this process? They shouldn't have done. The committee can only exist. The committee can only be respected in the way that Tobias wants if it is act seen to be nonpartisan and independent. And on the whole, in its previous years of existence, it succeeded in doing that. Chris Grayling denies that he was being manipulated, or was there as a stooge of number ten. And as we heard from Nick, the problem with Julian Lewis was saying one thing to the whip and doing something else. You say that a little.

Well, I'm saying egregious. I think what I'm saying is that the whip should never have asked him that question. Ultimately, the prime minister has a considerable exercise of veto on this committee because the conservative party members who go on it will be nominated by him and the opposition party members, he has to agree to them as well, for security reasons, and he negotiates that with the leader of the opposition. Once he's done that, once the lists have been ratified by the House of Commons and the House of Lords, the prime minister should be playing, and no, ten should be playing no further part in trying to steer or manipulate this committee.

Ok? It should be left to its own devices to get on. And history shows that when you do that, it can do some good work. Let's go on to the substance, then. You think that the Russia report, Tobias, is going to be underwhelming in that case, why wouldn't you just get it out? Just, you know, say, here it is, have a read. Is probably quite boring. The smacks of a government that's a. Worried about what people are going to see here. Well, it's a parliamentary report, so it's quite right that it's. You have a committee that's unable to make sure that happens. And now that the committee is in place, then I'm sure we will actually see that. But the information itself, Dominic Greaves would have read it himself. He put it together, will now be quite dated and life moves on at the moment very, very swiftly, indeed.

But like I said, we have firmly understand. So it is out of date. Of course it's out of date. It's been delayed, it's public to begin with. We had it ready by early 2019, but it had to go through a redaction process. It was then submitted to the prime minister for publication and it could have been published before the general election, which is when it should have been published. And as I've explained on many occasions, the explanations from number ten as to why they prevented it being published before the election were wholly incredible. And the result is another eleven months. Well, nearly nine months of delay to date, and I'm certainly not going to put pressure on the committee. If they can publish it before the recess, that would be wonderful. But they do have to take ownership of it and to expect them to do that in a few days, might be too much. It's a matter for them. But the delay is the government's fault.

And if it's out of date, will that tell us anything? I mean, is it going to be at all useful for understanding what's going on? I think there is material in it that the public will find informative and useful about the threat posed by Russia to this country. But I entirely accept that insofar as the threat may have altered in the last. You think the 18 months the threat could have gone away from? I doubt very much the threat has gone away, but if the threat is also. We are unable to update it to bias. Yeah, yeah. Can I do interdict here? I mean, the purpose of this report will actually underline what everybody now knows is the character of conflict is changing. Yes, there are traditional, conventional threats, but we now see disinformation campaigns, we now see cyberattacks, we now see data theft, copying of intellectual property. This is where I.

The actual war is going, and this is. Russia is very, very good at it, and we need to get better at responding. And part of that is what our clandestine services do and making sure we scrutinize that work. That's what we're focusing on. I don't disagree with Tobias about that. But this is why this report should have been published in late October last year. And the delay is, well, you've lost the opportunity of parliament and the public getting the information that might be of great use to understanding the threat from Russia for a nine month period. And I find that regrettable. And people go on talking about this content of the report, and as you appreciate, I cannot comment on the content. But this is a report by a sensible group of experienced politicians working on a bipartisan, non partisan basis with a desire of providing as much information to parliament and the public as we can. And holding it up in the way that it's been held up is just another indication, it seems to me, of an incoherent approach from number ten, Downing street, which I simply cannot fathom.

Explain this to me to buyers. If we're looking at a report that could have been very helpful, that wasn't particularly threatening to the government, that is now out of date that most people could have already interpreted, why would you go through the machinations of trying to install Chris Grayling? What was it about Chris Grayling's tenure as transport secretary for three years that made him so eminently suitable for this job? Now, I can't answer those questions. I'm not privy to the discussions as to the personalities that make up the committee, but I am frustrated. I've expected those in public that this committee has been absent and doing its duty. It's so important that we are able to show to the world as an exemplar of being that mother of all parliaments as to how we do things, and most importantly as well, has been touched on the fact that we do scrutinize raises the bar of government standards in the decision making they make themselves. But briefly, you wouldn't be putting any pressure to see the whip returned to Julian Lewis this evening. You're not taking that camp. The chief whip is a very reasonable person, as is Julian Lewis. But I have to say what he, he did this evening I think will raise questions.

But likewise, as to the manner of what has happened, it has been all unfortunate. I hope we can move forward because ultimately the higher cause, our duty to scrutinize what Mi five, Mi six and GCHQ does is more important than the arguments between colleagues. Thank you both very much. Thanks. Kami.

Politics, Government, Leadership, Intelligence, Uk Parliament, Russia Report, Bbc Newsnight