Tell us about your career before BASIC
“I’ve had a multifaceted career, starting in the financial sector as a corporate lending manager and later a banker. I progressed into human resources, becoming an HR Fellow and a Fellow of the Institute of Sales and Marketing, later setting up my own consultancy business, helping businesses struggling with their finances and individuals who had grievances, disputes, and industrial tribunals.
What started as temporary work as a HR Director with the UK Government’s Nuclear Decommissioning Authority in 2007 instead became an 11 year career.. My final role was as Director of Corporate Services, with the responsibility for the implementation of the Geological Disposal Facility Programme, one of the biggest programmes in Europe, working to ensure that nuclear waste is kept secure while being made ready for ultimate disposal.”
What brought you to BASIC?
“When I was approaching retirement, I wanted to do some work to ease me into a less hectic schedule, and for three years I became a Non-Executive Director of a group of companies in London. But during that time, I realised that what I really wanted to do was something where I could give back some of the knowledge and skills that I’ve developed across my career, as well as to continue my interest in nuclear policy. The opportunity came up to serve at BASIC and I came on as a Trustee in 2020, initially I was primarily involved with the finance and HR side of things. I was invited to become Chair in December 2024, which I accepted without hesitation.”
What would you say are the main areas of concern for you around the world?
When I worked in the nuclear energy sector there were, on rare occasions, errors and emergency situations that happened around the world. And you saw what harm could be caused just by accident, for example at Fukushima. Just imagine the disaster that would happen if that was done deliberately in a war situation, and you get some idea of the hardship and harm that could do to people, economies and the environment. That’s the thing that really keeps me awake at night.
You’re obviously a great believer in dialogue to address these problems?
Yes I am. The main ethos behind BASIC is to try and get people together and understand what it is that’s stopping them from trusting each other and working together to reduce nuclear weapons risks and stockpiles. Perhaps one phrase that sums up BASIC’s approach is that jaw-jaw is better than war-war.
“At most we’re two degrees of separation from the people who matter on any relevant topic. That means we have significant pulling power with the people who matter.”
And BASIC has such a good track record of promoting dialogue, bringing people with diametrically opposing views together to discuss their differences. It’s so important that I want to support it even further than we already do. After all, is there really any serious alternative to dialogue?
What do you think distinguishes BASIC from other organisations working on nuclear weapons policy?
BASIC is unique in its commitment to applying lessons and principles from conflict resolution and conflict transformation to the way we run our dialogues. Time and again, participants in our dialogues say that there is a “BASIC approach” that is different from others they attend. This is one major way in which we differentiate ourselves from other organisations.
Another is that BASIC is truly committed to understanding security in a more multi-dimensional way. We see nuclear policy issues as being intimately linked to the climate crisis, for instance, and see security as being about more than just weapons.
Perhaps finally, we’re all about people. BASIC’s networks among officials, experts, and academics, as well as our institutional relationships globally, are truly exceptional. At most we’re two degrees of separation from the people who matter on any relevant topic. That means we have significant pulling power with the people who matter.
Looking forward, how do you see BASIC progressing?
“We’ve grown a great deal over the last seven years, from an organisation of five staff to one of 20. My view is that we’re at a good size now: our programmes are working well and given the major funding squeeze facing the field, there is no need to pursue significant additional growth. The focus should be on consolidation and on strengthening our impact, rather than just growing for the sake of it.
As Chair of the Board of Trustees, I am keen to improve the diversity on the Board and develop talent on the Board and amongst our staff. I’ve always been interested in talent and getting the best out of people – we have so much talent across our Board and staff team, and it’s about organising them in the best possible way to achieve our institutional goals.