Jonathan Powell’s appointment as national security adviser will change the way the job works
Jonathan Powell's appointment sets a precedent that future prime ministers will follow.

The prime minister is entitled to make a political appointment as his National Security Adviser, and Powell has a strong CV. But that must not come at the cost of a coherent structure, says Alex Thomas
Jonathan Powell will be the first political appointee to be the national security adviser (NSA). There is a semi-precedent with Boris Johnson having offered, and then rescinded, the job to David Frost, but it seems certain that Powell will actually make it into the role.
The NSA is a relatively recent creation and all previous post-holders since 2010 have been career civil servants. Powell’s experience, as Tony Blair's chief-of-staff, in Northern Ireland, and his post-No10 global mediation career, makes him a credible choice, though he should be prepared for criticism about his role in the recent deal over the Chagos Islands, and more historically the Iraq war.
He will do the job as a political special adviser, which is a sensible decision. Inventing a civil service recruitment process to justify the appointment of a clearly political figure would have been damaging and difficult to justify. The prime minister should be able to choose his advisers, including on national security issues, and it would have been wrong to pretend that Powell is something that he is not. It is good that Labour seem to have learnt a lesson from their unforced errors on civil service appointments over the summer, but the prime minister – and the current and incoming cabinet secretary – will need to carefully think through the arrangements that will enable Powell to do the job, especially as future prime ministers will follow Starmer’s precedent.
Clarity will be needed about how the national security structure is to cohere
Powell, as a special adviser, will not be able to direct civil servants. He will be unable to manage the heads of the agencies – MI5, MI6 and GCHQ. Those key jobs will now report to the cabinet secretary. The deputy NSAs will do the same, and it seems that Powell will attend, but not be secretary to, or a formal member of, the National Security Council (NSC).
That is all sensible from a constitutional and a civil service management perspective. But what does it mean for how Powell does the job? Will he be a souped-up version of John Bew, the recently departed foreign policy adviser in No.10, able to offer his advice to the prime minister but without a wider role in the system? Or a full NSA with powers to direct officials in all but name? He will inevitably have views about the role and performance of ‘his’ deputies, so how will the cabinet secretary manage disagreements?
The point of creating the NSA and NSC in 2010 was to bring more coherence to a fragmented set of jobs, accountabilities and relationships. Governments are always twitchy about confirming too many details about how these security relationships work, but to give clarity to those inside and outside government it will be important to define how a political appointee will actually do the job.
Powell needs to show that he personally recognises the lessons from the Chilcot Inquiry
The very extent of Powell’s experience in the diplomatic and foreign policy field means that he will be questioned about his record – perhaps most of all over the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts when he was Tony Blair’s chief-of-staff. The Chilcot Inquiry set out essential lessons that were learned from Iraq about national security assessment, policy making and culture.
The NSA is in many ways the guardian and champion of those lessons, and Powell should actively demonstrate his commitment to their importance – to his new colleagues in the national security community, and in public appearances.
Good scrutiny will be even more important as the prime minister sets a new appointment precedent
The novelty of Powell’s appointment and the precedent it sets increases the importance of good scrutiny and accountability of the advice and decisions made by the NSA. The defence, national security and foreign affairs committees, as well as the Intelligence and Security Committee, will want to call Powell to give evidence, and they should question him about how he intends to manage the job. Other committees should ask the same questions of the prime minister and cabinet secretary.
The nature of the NSA’s work makes it hard to dig into too much detail about the policy advice Powell gives the prime minister, but Parliament does have the ability to scrutinise in private. It should use that facility, and Powell will need close links with MPs and peers to maintain his credibility in the role.
Keir Starmer has decided that he wants to appoint an experienced political ally to this vital job. In a turbulent world, where national security decisions and relationships – above all with the United States – are likely to come to the fore, he needs this appointment to work smoothly and well. That means rapid clarity about how a more complex set of actors are going to ensure the national security system coheres for the coming difficult years.
- Topic
- Ministers
- Keywords
- Defence and security Integrated Review of Security, Defence, Development and Foreign Policy Foreign affairs
- Political party
- Labour
- Administration
- Starmer government
- Public figures
- Keir Starmer
- Publisher
- Institute for Government