Letter to the Parliamentary Relations
and Devolution Department, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, from
the Second Clerk of the Committee, 1 July 2004
FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH OFFICE ANNUAL REPORT
2003-04
As you are aware, at the Committee's oral evidence
session with Sir Michael Jay on Tuesday a number of questions
which Members wished to ask were not reached owing to the pressure
of time. Please find below a list of these questions, to which
the Members would be grateful for your written response:
UK INTERNATIONAL
PRIORITIES
1. The Priorities document envisages a much
greater use of IT to de-centralise functions from London to posts.
Does this mark the end of the traditional "desk officers"
in London? If so, when would the Office envisage the change taking
place?
2. The Priorities document sets out challenging
diversity targets for the FCO's senior management service. In
order to achieve these, the Office will need to more than double
the number of minority ethnic senior staff it has, and increase
significantly the number of disabled and female staff at those
grades. Is the FCO confident it can achieve these targets? How?
3. The White Paper indicates that more posts
may be run by DfID officials in the future. Is there not a danger
that where such appointments are made it will be seen as downgrading
the bilateral relationship from a full political-diplomatic one
between equal nations, to an unequal one based solely on aid?
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT
4. As a result of the Gershon Review, the
FCO will be expected to continue finding annual efficiency savings
of 2.5% per annum in the next triennium. Is the Office ready to
face this continued challenge?
5. As the Office has already been achieving
such efficiencies for the last four years, would it be true to
say that most of the "easy hits" have now been made,
and that such savings would now begin to cut more deeply into
its activities?
6. Last year, Sir Michael was unable to
assure the Committee that the department was actually making genuine
efficiency savings, rather than simply having its budget cut by
2.5%. The heads of the BBC World Service and British Council were
able to give the Committee such an assurance last week. Can the
FCO?
7. When does the Office believe it will
cease to be viable for the FCO to find annual 2.5% efficiency
savings?
8. What was the additional cost to the Foreign
Office resulting from the conflict in Iraq in the last financial
year?
9. The FCO claimed £36.9 million from
the Contingency Reserve. Was the Office hoping for more? Did this
cover all the costs or were these supplemented by a re-allocation
of internal budgets?
10. What were the "lower priority activities"
that were foregone as a result of the additional expenditure in
Iraq?
MANAGEMENT OF
THE OVERSEAS
ESTATE
11. In one of its memoranda to the Committee,
the FCO told the Committee that the Office's rental bill in the
period 1998 to 2003 had remained relatively stable at around £64
million. What was the change in the actual proportion of rented
to owned properties in that period?
12. The FCO notes in the same memorandum
that the total bill has been helped by "movements in exchange
rates and favourable market factors". Does not the Office's
increased reliance on rented property make it more exposed to
the volatility of such factors in the future?
13. Has the FCO made any assessment of how
a weakening pound or unfavourable market factors will affect its
ability to make efficiency savings?
14. Given the modifications the FCO needs
to make to diplomatic buildings to make them fit-for-purpose-security,
telecommunications, etc—is it not nearly always better in
the long-run to buy a property rather than rent one?
15. Could the FCO provide the Committee
with an update on the future of the High Commissioner's Residence
in Cape Town and the Embassy in Prague?
VISA ENTRY
CLEARANCE
16. Why did the percentage of visa holders
whose leave to enter the UK was cancelled on arrival actually
rise marginally in the last year?
17. Once collected, with whom is the biometric
visa data shared and what safeguards are in place to prevent misuse?
18. During the Committee's recent visit
to India and Turkey it was clear that the involvement of three
different departments in the visa entry clearance system—the
Home Office, FCO and the DCA—created some difficulties and
tensions. Does the Office believe that the three departments do
work well together on this issue?
19. Decisions made by the Home Office on
the criteria for entry into the UK clearly have significant resource
implications for the FCO. Does the Office feel that it is always
properly consulted about decisions and given sufficient time to
plan accordingly?
Please could the Committee have your response
no later than Friday 16 July.
Geoffrey Farrar
Second Clerk of the Committee
1 July 2004
| 
