GRADING OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE
70. In view of the acknowledged importance of the
role, we were surprised to learn that the Chief Executive's post
has been down-graded from a three-star post to a two-star post.
Mr Andrews emphasised that the MoD did not believe the grade of
the post was important, but rather the prestige of leading a world-class
meteorological organisation would make the appointment attractive.[127]
Mr Andrews conceded that, when the post of Chief Executive was
initially advertised, the financial package was equivalent to
a two-star post, but he argued that the grading was a technical
matter that was only relevant if an internal Civil Service candidate
had been successful.[128]
71. Mr Ewins told us that downgrading the post would
inhibit the search for a new world class chief executive.[129]
He explained that "The Chief Executive of the Met Office
is normally appointed as the permanent representative to the World
Met Organisation", and that:
What gets you into the organisation is the quality
of what you do. The level at which you hold the discussions is
determined by the grade that you go in at. In order to have a
proper relationship with the United States […] it is, in
my view, a pity that we have lost the three-star interaction.[130]
He told us:
I think certainly internationally and to some
extent in dealing with the MoD, it is necessary for the Chief
Executive not just to have the title but to be seen to have this
wretched phrase "grade equivalence" with the people
with whom he does business. If we want to be successful in our
relationship, particularly with the United States, then it is
not sensible to downgrade the post of Chief Executive to two star
from three star. When I was Chief Executive my entrée into
the States, what determined the level at which I interacted with
the States was determined by my grade, not by who was running
what. As a three-star officer I was able to negotiate, talk and
discuss with the Head of [the National Oceanic & Atmospheric
Administration]. You downgrade that and discussions will take
place only with the Head of the National Weather Service, which
will rule out things like climate change, et cetera, et cetera,
so I think it is a bad move. Internally to MoD it is less important,
but it does not take officers long before they start to realise
you have been downgraded and they do treat one differently. The
last point I would make is that in operating in the international
arena, particularly in the World Met Organisation, whilst it is
undoubtedly true that the principal reason the Met Office gets
a good hearing is because of the quality of what it does, people
are also conscious of the level at which the Chief Executive has
been appointed. All those things add up and it saddens me that
the post has been downgraded.[131]
72. Mr Andrews responded to those arguments that
"the internal grade of the individual [does not have] any
significance at all".[132]
When we pressed Mr Andrews on the significance afforded to grades
within the MoD he dismissed the suggestion, adding that he did
not know what his military rank equivalence was. It is remarkable
that as a very senior civil servant in the MoD Mr Andrews was
unaware of his rank equivalent. We understand it to be four stars.
73. The new Chief Executive will have many challenges,
including continuing to develop the opportunities for commercial
enterprise. Mr Andrews said that in selecting the new chief executive
commercial awareness "is very much at the forefront of our
minds in terms of the skills and competences we need to bring
in".[133] It
seems absurd, given the calibre of the person the MoD is seeking,
and has so far failed to find, that the MoD has reduced the grade
of the post of Chief Executive of the Met Office. If the candidate
is from outside the civil service, as seems probable given the
importance of commercial experience, their grade will still be
important in their relationship with the MoD and the international
meteorological community.
74. We can find no justification for the proposed
down-grading of the post of Chief Executive. Despite the MoD's
protestations, it is inconceivable that a reduction in grade of
the Chief Executive will have no effect on how that post or person
is perceived within the MoD or international science and meteorological
communities. Given the difficulties in identifying a suitable
permanent replacement as Chief Executive down-grading cannot assist
in finding someone with suitable experience and skills. We recommend
that the MoD reverse its decision and retain the three-star grade
for the Chief Executive.
75. The Met Office excels in its main task of providing
accurate forecasts. Mr Ewins told us that "there are very
few areas of scientific endeavour where the UK can claim to be
the best in the world, but meteorology is one of them, and it
is largely through the Met Office that that is achieved".[134]
He praised the efforts of previous Directors General and Chief
Executives, and the "hard graft of people who are utterly
dedicated to the subject to want the best for the United Kingdom"
that had led to the Met Office's well-deserved reputation.[135]
From the evidence we have received it appears that the MoD has
supported the Met Office and encouraged its scientific research,
commercial activity and contribution to the Armed Forces.[136]
We look to the Government, through the MoD, to maintain the
support and investment that enables the Met Office to retain its
world-leading position. That support must include doing everything
to encourage the best possible candidates to apply for the post
of Chief Executive.
63 
