Annual Report 2003
5. In his Foreword to the 2003 Report, the Foreign
Secretary, Rt Hon Jack Straw MP, described the last twelve months
as a "rigorous test for British diplomacy." He highlighted
the impact of the tragic bombing in the Indonesian island of Bali,
the Foreign Office's work before and after the military action
in Iraq and the threat from global terrorism as being particularly
difficult challenges during the year.[6]
Mr Straw also stressed the "crucial role" that the United
Kingdom had played in significant developments across the globe,
such as the Middle East Peace Process, European Union (EU) and
North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) enlargement, the launch
of the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the negotiation
of the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention (BTWC). The Report
then goes on to describe these developments, and many other aspects
of the Office's work (from its responsibility to the UK's Overseas
Territories, to its attempts to halt the illicit trade in rough
diamonds), in much greater detail in subsequent chapters.
6. For some years, our Committee has stressed the
importance of the Foreign Office expressing its performance in
cost-benefit terms.[7]
Too often, we argued, the Office had failed to highlight the benefits
it had brought to the taxpayer through relatively modest expenditure.
We were very pleased to note, therefore, that at the end of nearly
every chapter of the latest report there is a section entitled
'Cost Benefit', giving specific examples of some of the Office's
achievements during the previous year.[8]
For example, at the end of the chapter on 'Prosperity,' the Report
notes that the activities of one mission in Japan, costing around
£55,000 per annum, helped pave the way for £100 million
worth of investment in new construction technology.[9]
We greatly welcome these practical illustrations of the valuable
work done by the FCO across the world. We recommend that the
FCO continues to present cost-benefit illustrations of its work.
These should include not merely examples of where the FCO has
secured very substantial benefit in relation to the cost incurred,
but also where substantial costs have been incurred for only very
limited, and perhaps even negative, benefit.
7. On the whole, the Annual Report 2003 is a well-presented,
informative document, with which the FCO can be pleased. It sets
out clearly the Office's objectives and targets and relates them
to its actual achievements. It provides detailed information on
a wide range of issues, and also gives useful examples of the
Office's work in a series of text boxes, describing, for example,
the experiences of an entry clearance officer in Mongolia.[10]
The Committee was particularly pleased to note that many of the
changes we recommended in our Report last year on the Annual Report
2002 have been included in this latest publication, especially
in relation to the presentation of financial information.[11]
During the course of this inquiry, we raised several detailed,
minor, issues related to the use of language and the style of
presentation in the Annual Report 2003 with the Foreign Office,
and trust that these matters will be dealt with in its next Report.
8. A criticism that is sometimes raised in relation
to publications such as departmental annual reports is that they
are too often simply a 'good news story' that fail to present
a balanced, comprehensive view of a department's achievements
and difficulties over the year. This style of presentation is
understandable given any organisation's natural desire to stress
its strengths over its weaknesses. However, it is particularly
important for a Government department to use the opportunity which
an annual report represents to give the most candid assessment
possible of its work to those whom it exists to serve. We regret
to note, therefore, that in this year's annual Report there are
several occasions where the FCO could be more frank about areas
in which it had hoped to achieve better results. For example,
the section of the Report dealing with developments in the EU,
while rightly praising the FCO's work in securing the Union's
enlargement, makes no real mention of the difficulties the UK
faced in securing an extension of the Union's sanctions regime
against Zimbabwe nor in promoting fundamental reform of the Common
Agricultural Policy (CAP).[12]
This contrasts with chapter seven of the Report, which, in relation
to the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) in Johannesburg,
recorded that: "the UK is active in promoting renewable energy;
we would have liked to have seen a specific commitment from everyone
at WSSD to do likewise".[13]
This does not detract from the FCO's efforts at the summit, but
gives an honest assessment of what actually happened there to
the lay reader and there can surely only be advantage in following
such an example in other parts of the Report.
9. We raised our concern on this matter with Sir
Michael Jay when he gave oral evidence to the Committee. He argued
strongly that the Report gave a "positive account of what
was a fairly remarkable year" and was not overly Panglossian
in its presentation.[14]
However, he accepted that in some areas the Department could usefully
be a little more self-critical.[15]
We conclude that, on the whole, the Foreign and Commonwealth
Office's Annual Report 2003 is a well-presented and informative
account of the year to April 2003 for the department. However,
we recommend that future Reports strive to reflect more accurately
both those areas where the Office has met, or surpassed, its objectives
and those where it had hoped to achieve more.
10. We feel that it is very important, though, that
the concerns we raise in this Report, and elsewhere, about specific
areas of the Foreign Office's work do not detract from our overall
support for the very valuable work it does. In the vast majority
of cases, we believe that the United Kingdom is served extremely
well by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and its agencies.
Its dedicated staff working throughout the world, both UK nationals
and those engaged locally, provide an excellent service to the
vast majority of those with whom it comes into contact. In London
and when visiting overseas we are repeatedly struck by the quality,
professionalism and dedication of its personnel, often working
in very difficult and dangerous situations. The Annual
Report 2003 gives a very useful picture of this service and the
people who provide it. We conclude that the Foreign Office
is rightly proud of the vast majority of the work done by its
staff, as set out in the Annual Report 2003. We place on record
our thanks and support to all those who work in the Foreign Office
and its agencies for the dedicated service they provide to this
country.
6 Foreign and Commonwealth
Office, Foreign and Commonwealth Office Departmental Report
2003, May 2003, Cm 5913, pp 2-5, hereafter referred to as
'Departmental Report 2003' (www.fco.gov.uk). Back
7
See, for example: Foreign Affairs Committee, Twelfth Report of
Session 2001-02, Foreign and Commonwealth Office Annual Report
2002, HC 826, para 17. This and all Committee material subsequently
referred to is available at the Committee's homepage: www.parliament.uk/parliamentary_committees/foreign_affairs_committee.cfm. Back
8
Departmental Report 2003, pp 46, 55, 64, 80, 94, 106,120, 128,
136, 146 and 158 Back
9
Departmental Report 2003 p 64 Back
10
Departmental Report 2003, p 127 Back
11
See: Foreign Affairs Committee, Twelfth Report of Session 2001-02,
Foreign and Commonwealth Office Annual Report 2002, HC 826, paras
6-13, and FCO, Foreign and Commonwealth Office Annual Report 2002:
Response of the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth
Affairs, Cm 5712, January 2003, p 1. Back
12
Departmental Report 2003, p 102 Back
13
Departmental Report 2003, p 67 Back
14
Q 1 Back
15
Q 4 Back
|
