Further memorandum submitted by the Foreign
and Commonwealth Office
GUIDANCE TO POSTS
Letter to the Parliamentary Relations
and Devolution Department, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, from
the Clerk of the Committee, 3 March 2003
In recommendation "ff" of its Report
on the FCO Annual Report 2002[3],
the Foreign Affairs Committee asked the Government to issue detailed
guidance to its diplomats on how they should respond to requests
from ministers that they should draft letters of support for companies
seeking contracts abroad, when those companies are declared donors
to a British political party.
In your letter to me of 18 October 2002 (published
at page Ev 91 of the Report) you stated that the existing general
guidelines from London provide a framework, that where there are
grounds for concern or areas of uncertainty, only consultation
with London can establish what would be appropriate, and that
Ministers had therefore concluded that additional guidance would
not materially help Posts. You enclosed with your letter a copy
of Sir Michael Jay's telegram of 18 February 2002, and an extract
from BTI Guidelines dated December 1999. In its response to the
Report[4],
the Government reaffirmed that "Guidance exists to cover
situations where [civil servants] are asked to act in a way that
is, or which they believe may be, inconsistent with their duty
of impartiality." It is not clear from the response exactly
which "guidance" is being referred to at that point.
The Committee wishes to receive copies of all
guidance issued to members of the diplomatic service which may
be relevant to the question of how they should respond to requests
from ministers that they should draft letters of support for companies
seeking contracts abroad, when those companies are declared donors
to a British political party. The Committee also wishes to receive
a fuller explanation of why Ministers decided not to issue specific
guidance on how to deal with such circumstances, when previous
statements to the Committee had suggested that such guidance would
be issued.
Clerk of the Committee
March 2003
Letter to the Clerk of the Committee from
the Parliamentary Relations and Devolution Department, Foreign
and Commonwealth Office, 25 March 2003
Thank you for your letter of 3 March seeking
further information in response to recommendation "ff"
of the Committee's Report on the FCO Annual Report 2002. This
related to guidance to diplomats on how they should respond to
requests from Ministers to draft letters of support for companies
seeking contracts abroad, when those companies are declared donors
to a British political party.
The Committee asked to receive copies of all
guidance issued to members of the Diplomatic Service that may
be relevant to this question. The Committee has already received
a copy of the telegram issued by Michael Jay on 18 February 2002
and the relevant extract from the BTI guidelines. Further material
relates to guidance on the general duties, responsibilities, values
and standards of Civil Servants and members of the Diplomatic
Service. I attach relevant extracts from the Diplomatic Service
Code and Regulations. These include guidance on action where an
individual is asked to act in a way which they believe is inconsistent
with their duty of impartiality.
The Committee also wished to receive a fuller
explanation of why Ministers decided not to issue specific guidance
on this matter. Consideration was given to whether further guidance
would be helpful in clarifying the circumstances in which support
should be offered to companies. The conclusion was that it would
not. In an increasingly complex trade and investment environment
whether there is a benefit to the UK from lending diplomatic support
to a particular company, is a matter of judgement. In most cases
the question of whether there is sufficient benefit to the UK
will be self-evident and no further guidance is necessary. In
a small number of cases at the margins, the issue will be less
clear-cut, but the view was taken that it would be difficult to
produce useful guidance to cover the very varied nature of such
cases. That the existing material was in the form of "guidelines"
rather than "rules" is itself indicative of the need
for a flexible approach. Michael Jay's telegram of 18 February
reminded Heads of Posts of the importance of consultation with
London where appropriate. Against this background it was decided
that no change should be made to the existing guidance.
Parliamentary Relations & Devolution Department,
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
March 2003
EXTRACT FROM
DIPLOMATIC SERVICE
REGULATIONS
General Principles of Conduct
6.1 You are expected at all times to respect
the law of the land. Against that background the following general
principles govern your conduct as a member of the Diplomatic Service:
(a) you must give your individual allegiance
to the State on all occasions when the State has a claim on your
services;
(b) you must not subordinate your duty to
your private interests, not put yourself in a position where your
duty and your private interests conflict;
(c) you must not use your official position
to further your private interests, nor act so as to create a reasonable
suspicion that you have done so;
(d) you must not engage in heavy gambling
or speculation;
(e) you must not engage in private financial
transactions in connection with any matter on which members of
the Diplomatic Service might be suspected of having access to
information which could be turned to private gain;
(f) you must not engage in any occupation
or undertaking which might conflict with the interests of the
Diplomatic Service or be inconsistent with your position as a
member of the Service;
(g) you must not fall short of the professional
standard expected of members of the Diplomatic Service or act
in a way which might bring discredit upon the Service;
(h) your behaviour, action or inaction must
not significantly disrupt or damage the performance or reputation
of the Diplomatic Service.
6.2 Special rules governing particular activities
are contained in individual Regulations. However, it is not possible
to cover in every activity and in circumstances not specifically
covered you should use discretion in accordance with the above
principles, and in accordance with the guidance contained in the
Diplomatic Service Code of Ethics (Annex A to these Regulations),
seeking advice from your superior officer or from PPU [Personnel
Policy Unit] if you are in doubt.
6.3 Where you believe you are being required
to act in a way which is illegal, improper, unethical, in breach
of constitutional convention or a professional code, which may
involve possible maladministration, or which is otherwise inconsistent
with the Diplomatic Service Code of Ethics you may consult in
confidence a member of a Selection Board, who will then take the
matter up on your behalf. If the problem cannot be resolved you
may take the matter up with the Chief Clerk (now Director-General
Corporate Affairs] and you also have the right, in the last resort,
to have the matter referred to the Permanent Under Secretary/
Head of the Diplomatic Service, through the Chief Clerk. [Emphasis
added]
6.4 If after following the above procedure
you are not content with the response you have received you may
raise the matter with the Diplomatic Service Appeal Board (see
DSR 20).
Annex A
DIPLOMATIC SERVICE
CODE OF
ETHICS
This Code of Ethics offers guidance on the constitutional
framework within which all members of the Diplomatic Service work
and the values and standards, which they are expected, uphold.
Specific rules and principles of conduct, which reflect the standards
of this Code, are laid down in Diplomatic Service regulations.
1. The constitutional and practical role
of the Diplomatic Service is, with integrity, honesty, impartiality
and objectivity, to assist the duly constituted Government, of
whatever political complexion, in formulating policies of the
Government, carrying out decisions of the Government and in administering
public services for which the Government is responsible.
2. Members of the Diplomatic Service are
servants of the Crown. Constitutionally, the Crown acts on the
advice of Ministers and, subject to the provisions of this Code,
Members of the Diplomatic Service owe their loyalty to the duly
constituted Government.
3. This Code should be seen in the context
of the duties and responsibilities of Ministers set out in Questions
of Procedure for Ministers which include:
— accountability to Parliament;
— the duty to give Parliament and the
public as full information as possible about the policies, decisions
and actions for the Government, and not to deceive or knowingly
mislead Parliament and the public;
— the duty not to use public resources
for party political purposes, to uphold the political impartiality
of the Diplomatic Service, and not to ask Members of the Diplomatic
Service to act in any way which would conflict with the Diplomatic
Service Code;
— the duty to give fair consideration
and due weight to informed and impartial advice from Members of
the Diplomatic Service, as well as to other considerations and
advice, in reaching decisions; and
— the duty to comply with the law,
including international law and treaty obligations, and to uphold
the administration of justice;
together with the duty to familiarise themselves
with the contents of this Code.
4. Members of the Diplomatic Service should
serve the duly constituted Government in accordance with the principles
set out in this Code and recognising:
— the accountability of Members of
the Diplomatic Service to the Minister, as the case may be, the
office holder in charge of their department;
— the duty of all public officers to
discharge public functions reasonably an according to the law;
— the duty to comply with the law,
including international law and treaty obligations, and to uphold
the administration of justice; and
— ethical standards governing particular
professions.
5. Members of the Diplomatic Service should
conduct themselves with integrity, impartiality and honesty. They
should give honest and impartial advice to Ministers, without
fear or favour, and make all information relevant to a decision
available to Ministers. They should not deceive or knowingly mislead
Ministers, Parliament or the public.
6. Members of the Diplomatic Service should
endeavour to deal with the affairs of the public sympathetically,
efficiently, promptly and without bias or maladministration.
7. Members of the Diplomatic Service should
endeavour to ensure the proper, effective and efficient use of
public money.
8. Members of the Diplomatic Service should
not misuse their official position or information acquired in
the course of their official duties to further their private interests
or those of others. They should not receive benefits of any kind
from a third party which might reasonably be seen to compromise
their personal judgement or integrity.
9. Members of the Diplomatic Service should
conduct themselves in such a way as to deserve and retain the
confidence of Ministers and to be able to establish the same relationship
with those whom they may be required to serve in some future Administration.
They should comply with restrictions on their political activities.
The conduct of Members of the Diplomatic Service should be such
that Ministers and potential future Ministers can be sure that
confidence can be freely given, and that the Diplomatic Service
will conscientiously fulfil its duties and obligations to, and
impartially assist, advise and carry out the policies of the duly
constituted Government.
10. Members of the Diplomatic Service should
not without authority disclose official information which has
been communicated in confidence within Government, or received
in confidence from others. Nothing in the Code should be taken
overriding existing statutory or common law obligations to keep
confidential, or to disclose, certain information. They should
not seek to frustrate or influence the plies, decisions or actions
of Government by unauthorised, improper or premature disclosure
outside the Government of any information to which they have had
access as Member of the Diplomatic Service.
11. Where a Member of the Diplomatic Service
believes he or she is being required to act in a way which;
— is illegal, improper, or unethical;
— is in breach of constitutional convention
or a professional code;
— may involve possible maladministration;
or
— is otherwise inconstant with the
Code;
he or she should report the matter in accordance
with the procedure laid down in departmental guidance or rules
of conduct. A member of the Diplomatic Service should also report
to the appropriate authorities evidence of criminal or unlawful
activity by others and may also report in accordance with departmental
procedures if he or she becomes aware of other breaches of this
Code or is required to act in a way which, for him or her, raises
a fundamental issue of conscience.
12. Where a Member of the Diplomatic Service
has reported a matter covered in paragraph 11 in accordance with
procedures laid down in departmental guidance or rules of conduct
and believes that the response does not represent a reasonable
response to the grounds of his or her concern, he or she may report
the matter in writing to the Diplomatic Service Appeal Board.
13. Members if the Diplomatic Service should
not seek to frustrate the policies, decisions or actions of Government
by declining to take, or abstaining from, action which flows from
Ministerial decisions. Where a matter cannot be resolved by the
procedures set out in paragraphs 11 or 12 above, on a basis which
the Member of the Diplomatic Service concerned is able to accept,
he or she should either carry out his or her instructions, or
resign from the Diplomatic Service. Members of the Diplomatic
Service should continue to observe their duties of confidentiality
after they have left Crown employment.
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
February 1996
3 Twelfth Report from the Foreign Affairs Committee,
Session 2001-02, Foreign and Commonwealth Office Annual Report
2002, HC 826. Back
4
Government Response to the Twelfth Report of the Foreign Affairs
Committee, Session 2001-02, Foreign and Commonwealth Office Annual
Report 2002, CM 5712. Back
| 
