Select Committee on Foreign Affairs Minutes of Evidence



Examination of Witnesses (Questions 568 - 579)

THURSDAY 16 JULY 1998

RT HON ROBIN COOK, MP, MR MICHAEL ARTHUR, CMG and MR ROBERT MACAIRE

Chairman

  568.  Foreign Secretary, may I welcome you again to the Committee. You will be aware that today we begin the first part of the compromise arrangement reached between the Committee and yourself. Under this a summary of the telegrams which we have sought in relation to Sierra Leone will be available to Members of the Committee on a confidential basis, with Members of the Committee visiting the Foreign and Commonwealth Office to verify the accuracy of that summary. Hence, today's session will be part public and part private according to the arrangement which we have reached relating to those telegrams. You have indicated to the Committee that you have to leave for the Cabinet at 10.15 or so.
  (Mr Cook)  10.20.

  569.  So time is limited. We will therefore need to make as much progress as we can. There are one or two other matters which will need to be raised in the open and public part of the session. Perhaps you will first introduce your colleague before I call Dr Godman to raise the first question.
  (Mr Cook)  The colleague with me at the table is Michael Arthur who is Director of Resources. I was advised that the Committee may wish to ask about the outcome of the Comprehensive Spending Review, and indeed I am bound to say that it would be rather odd if we had this hearing with me this week without me discussing such an important matter to the future of the Foreign Office. Mr Arthur has been responsible for steering me through the shoals of figures and the negotiations that we have had over the last two or three months. For the closed session I will be joined by Mr Robert Macaire. Mr Macaire had the duty of summarising the telegrams and I anticipated the Committee might find it as helpful as I for him to be present.

  570.  What is his rank within the FCO, his position?
  (Mr Cook)  We value greatly all our staff but Mr Macaire himself is not a head of department, he is a desk officer.

  571.  Within the West Africa Department?
  (Mr Cook)  No. We set up a small unit to handle the volume of questions that we are receiving on Legg, Sandline and Sierra Leone and they are decentralised to Mr Macaire and one other officer.

Dr Godman

  572.  Foreign Secretary, you will be telling us, I suppose, that you are reasonably happy or satisfied with the Comprehensive Spending Review.
  (Mr Cook)  Reasonably happy, yes; never satisfied. I do not think even the Secretaries of State for Health and Education would be satisfied, we always have great ambitions. Happy, yes. The outcome of the Comprehensive Spending Review for the Foreign Office fully protects us against inflation and gives us an increase which is in line with the average increase across Government departments, excluding health and education which for policy reasons we are focusing larger increases on. I think I am right in saying—Mr Arthur can correct me if I stray—that the average increase across all our four votes is about two per cent over the three years, over the diplomatic wing it is about one and a half per cent and this allows for the fact that we have put a particularly large increase of 3.4 per cent per annum into the BBC World Service. This is the biggest real terms increase which the Foreign Office has actually received for many years. In the course of the last Parliament its financial resources went down 21 per cent. It has been warmly welcomed throughout the Service because it ends a period of decline of resources and will enable us actually to look at some areas of expansion. Particular areas of expansion which I am anxious to pursue are in the new countries of Central and Eastern Europe which are the applicant countries to the European Union where it is very important that we build on the excellent goodwill we have achieved during the British Presidency for the competent and supportive way in which we have launched the enlargement negotiations. We will then also be looking at areas of commercial opportunity. One in particular where we are very badly resourced at the present time is in the Caspian Basin which will meet ten per cent of the world's additional oil demand in a decade's time. At the present time we have only got 13 people in the total of the Central Asian Caspian countries. That compares with 99 for Germany. In two of the countries we have no representation at all. The useful uplift we have had in our budget will enable us to address that very bad weakness.

  573.  I do not have a platoon of researchers analysing these figures for me but it has been put to me that there are staffing and post implications in the 0.8 per cent drop in real growth in the years 2000-01 and 2001-02. Is it not the case that those figures reveal a real terms increase only in the year 1999-2000?
  (Mr Cook)  As a real terms increase over the three year period, you are right that it is front loaded and frankly we need that front loading. One of the biggest pressures I have at the present time is the need to improve our IT. We have a very serious IT problem which I inherited at the Foreign Office and indeed it is not millennium compliant. We have a potential nightmare facing us in the year 2000. That is why it is urgent that we do spend more on IT in that early year.
  (Mr Arthur)  Thank you, Chairman. Just one point or comment on the minus 0.8 that Dr Godman mentioned. There are two different ways of calculating real uplift. Minus 0.8 is a year on year calculation and, as the Foreign Secretary says, there is a big rise in year one. There is, in real terms measured against a standard base line of this year uplifted for inflation, still a real rise in both years two and three. But because the graph becomes flatter the change becomes, year on year, negative in year three.

  574.  One last question. I questioned Sir John Kerr on the cost of the new embassy in Moscow. At £81 million pounds I suggested it was going to cost a hell of a lot more than the new Scottish Parliament. He did not seem much concerned about that comparison between the Parliament and the embassy. I am pleased to hear about the recruitment of staff along the Caspian Sea. I think that is good news. Given what Gordon Brown said in his statement: "Perhaps the most important advantage of conducting a Comprehensive Spending Review is the opportunity it allows for individual services to put in place a substantial reallocation of resources within departments", how are you going to change the hierarchy of the Foreign Office? There is the perceived view that it is staffed by Oxbridge classicists who have not had much contact with the real world.
  (Mr Cook)  I think I am going to have to enter a reserve on the last phrase. The people in the Foreign Office are of high calibre, of high quality and of high dedication. I would say, in fairness to them, that I have been refreshingly pleased by the enthusiasm with which they have accepted new agendas from the new Government and have worked to implement them. I think also many of those within the service recognise that the management of the service has to modernise, has to move with the times. Over the last year we have been addressing the question of whether or not we really are representative of the modern Britain. In particular I have brought in Whitehall's first Ethnic Minorities Liaison Officer who has had considerable success and the last recruitment round showed a doubling of applications from Africans and from ethnic communities within Britain. There is a long way still to go in order to make sure that the Foreign Office is open, is accessible and is modern in its management methods. Some of the issues that are now addressed, first of all, can we achieve more interchange with the private sector, people seconded out and seconded in, would that help to open up the culture; secondly we have, as I have said, some extremely bright, able people in the Foreign Office, do we really——

  575.  With different ethnic backgrounds?
  (Mr Cook)  At the present time, we are unquestionably under-represented in some of the ethnic communities which make up modern Britain which is why I have embarked on the programme I have to address that issue. Also, we are very short on gender balance at the top. There are no women in the very top ranks of management at the Foreign Office and there is only a single figure number of women who are Heads of Missions. That is an issue that will need to be addressed over time. Also, I do want to make sure, as with modern management methods in the private sector, there is opportunity for able and bright people in the Foreign Office to show initiative, that not all decisions are handed down and that will mean that we need to look at whether or not we are promoting fast enough on merit. I was quite interested to discover that there are only half a dozen ambassadors around the world who are as young as the Prime Minister of Britain so maybe that point is something that needs to be addressed.

Dr Godman:  One final question and then I will wrap up for the moment.

Chairman:  I think we must move on.

Dr Godman:  Okay. Calm down you will get your chance.

Chairman:  Foreign Secretary, colleagues have perhaps one question or so on the Comprehensive Spending Review. Ernie?

Mr Ross:  I am sorry, Chairman, it is not very often we get the Foreign Secretary here. We simply cannot have the person who is responsible for Britain's foreign policy here and not raise with him the questions that have been raised with us. I apologise to you, Foreign Secretary, I know you are anxious to get on to the main business this morning. I want to ask you about the Comprehensive Spending Review with regard to the BBC World Service and the British Council. Just as importantly, on Friday a conference taking place to perhaps establish the International Criminal Court will come to a conclusion, and our offices have been inundated with messages that it may not come to a conclusion. I am sure you are aware of the fact why it might not come to that conclusion. I think we have to ask you what do you think about that? The fact of the matter is if you do not establish an International Criminal Court we are going to be literally held responsible by many organisations, many individuals, and if one thinks about the aftermath of Sierra Leone there may well be individuals who we want to bring to justice. Part of the problem with Rwanda is the fact that some of those people who committed some of the worst atrocities have not been brought to justice and that is because we do not have the court except the specific one for Rwanda. I do want to come back to the BBC World Service and the British Council within the context of the Comprehensive Spending Review but can I ask you as quickly as you can to explain to us why we have got ourselves into a situation where we have seen at least NGOs are suggesting to us as individual Members of Parliament that we seem to be not sabotaging but making it more difficult for us to come to conclusions where there might well be the establishment of an International Criminal Court?

Chairman

  576.  Foreign Secretary, we will have that one on the International Criminal Court, one on the World Service and then we must make progress on Sierra Leone.
  (Mr Cook)  I am happy to answer what questions are put to me, Chairman. On the International Criminal Court, it is a very serious moment in the development of the International Criminal Court because the Rome Conference is due to finish tomorrow. If it finishes without agreement then we are not in a position to take forward the International Criminal Court. It is very much the policy of this Government to give strong support to the setting up of the International Criminal Court precisely for the reason Mr Ross alluded to. At the present time we are creating ad hoc tribunals wherever there has been genocide or major war crimes like Rwanda, the former Yugoslavia. In other words we are inventing a fire engine and redesigning it every time there is a fire. It would be much better if we have a permanent body with a permanent procedure or expertise, agreed procedures and ready to go into an action when required. We have shifted Britain's policy from being a back marker in that to being in the front rank and we are one of the like minded group which are the strongest supporters of the International Criminal Court. Our objective is to secure an effective credible International Criminal Court with the maximum power of independence for the Court and its prosecutor and with the widest credible application of its jurisdiction. Of course we are involved in an international negotiation which I have to say has not been easy. I would pay tribute to our officials in very tough circumstances trying to find agreement which will still allow for an effective and credible Court. One of the tests of its effectiveness and credibility is whether it has a wide degree of support of states that are ratifying and supporting the International Criminal Court. It would not be credible if it was only supported by ourselves and a couple of dozen other like minded nations. That is why the outcome may not fully reflect our own policy or our own design for the Court but we will continue to press vigorously negotiations to get as close to what we would wish to as possible.

Mr Ross

  577.  Obviously in your manifesto you gave a commitment to supporting the World Service and the British Council. As a Committee we went to have lunch with the British Council on the day the Comprehensive Spending Review was announced. We have a Vice Chairman of the British Council on our Committee, I am surprised she does not want to say something about that British Council. Certainly from that sharp nose dive in the 1980s it seems to have come up as far as the British Council is concerned and it appears to be not only coming up but levelling out and then increasing slightly.
  (Mr Cook)  In fairness to Mrs Bottomley I think one should record that she said quite a lot yesterday in the House on the British Council. Mr Ross is correct, the British Council has been through a very difficult period of retrenchment. In the last three years of the last administration it took a 14 per cent cut in its grant from the Foreign Office which had a very severe impact on its operations and did result in a 17 per cent reduction in staff which has not only meant some restrictions on what it can do but it has put additional pressure on the staff who remain. This Spending Review provides for full protection of the budget of the British Council and for an increase in real terms pro rata with that of the Diplomatic Wing of the Foreign Office. I have myself shared out of the resources I got from the Diplomatic Wing the additional resources to enable for that modest real growth in the British Council. We are strongly committed to it.

Chairman

  578.  And the World Service?
  (Mr Cook)  The World Service has the biggest increase of all of the four votes under my Department, its increase is 3.4 per cent over the three year period. First of all, can I say the three year period itself is valuable to the World Service. The last administration in 1995 scrapped the triennial agreement for the World Service and made it a year on year agreement which produced uncertainty and an inability to plan the World Service. So they gained from the fact that we have restored the three year funding agreement. Secondly, we have provided additional resources for them to move into new technology, modernisation of radio, digital transmission, moving their services on to the Internet through on-line provision of it so they will be moving with the times in rapid technological growth of the media and that is most important of all, Chair. We inherited what was an impossible position for the World Service in that the previous administration had said that they could only fund the new transmitter they need in Oman by a Private Finance Initiative, they were unable to find a private partner for that but there was not a penny in our public spending plans for that very big project, it is the biggest single capital undertaking. I am pleased to say this Spending Review fully funds that transmitter.

Mr Ross:  Before you continue, could I just say that yesterday during the debate there was an absolutely disgraceful attack on the new Chairman of the British Council by the hon. Member for New Forest East. Do you have confidence in the new chair?

Chairman

  579.  Do you have confidence?
  (Mr Cook)  Absolutely. I should say, to reinforce the objectivity in that view, that it was not I who chose her, she was chosen by the panel from within the British Council, a panel which included all shades of view and I think was actually chaired by a former Conservative Member of Parliament. She won the selection on merit. I am very pleased with the choice. I have total confidence in her. She is a distinguished barrister and has played a very important role in public life and comment in Britain. I rather suspect those comments that were made under the cloak of privilege will not be repeated outside.

Chairman:  Thank you, Foreign Secretary. We would now like to move to Sierra Leone and Sir Peter Emery would like to start the questions.

Sir Peter Emery:  Foreign Secretary, thank you for coming. We know you only have 75 minutes with us and we have spent 25 per cent of that time on other matters. Can I put two questions on Sierra Leone to you. The first is that on 6 June Sir John Legg was asked by me whether he considered that the work of Sir Thomas Legg and his inquiry was more important than the work of this Committee.

Mr Ross:  We have not had Sir John Legg in front of us.


 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries

© Parliamentary copyright 1998
Prepared 29 September 1998