Examination of Witnesses (Questions 20-39)
MR ASIF
AHMAD AND
MR PAUL
WHITEWAY
30 OCTOBER 2007
Q20 Mr Wright: You have mentioned
that some have decided to co-locate their offices with the diplomatic
posts. Which ones have and which ones have not? Also, have any
RDAs set up their offices since our last report?
Mr Whiteway: SEEDA and SWERDA
have agreed to co-locate with the British High Commission, I think,
in Mumbai, and in addition Invest Northern Ireland also have expressed
a wish to co-locate.
Q21 Mr Wright: What were the reasons
they gave for that?
Mr Whiteway: The reasons for co-location
go back to a study which UKTI and the RDAs conducted back in the
summer of 2004, when we were looking at how to bring about better
co-ordination with the RDAs in particular markets. We identified
a series of measures that could be taken to improve co-ordination.
One of those measures was the possibility of co-location with
UKTI offices where that is possible. Of course, in some instances,
it just is not possible in terms of space, but we have identified
opportunities in India and SEEDA and SWERDA have come together
and are appointing a single individual who will represent them
co-located with UKTI and INI, Invest Northern Ireland, have done
the same.
Q22 Mr Wright: This is something
that you would promote for others to do?
Mr Whiteway: I think this sort
of model is a very interesting model. It is something which in
the past has not always been very easy to achieve but this is
a possible approach for the future.
Q23 Mr Wright: Do you not see that
they are going to lose some of their identity by doing this?
Mr Whiteway: I think that is very
much a matter for the RDAs to respond on. The inclusion of individuals
like that with a specific regional background clearly provides
additional expertise alongside our own staff in the High Commission
and that I think has its advantages.
Q24 Mr Wright: Has there been any
RDA set up since our last report?
Mr Whiteway: The SEEDA/SWERDA
operation that I have just described—I think they are just
going through the recruitment process now—is one example
of that. I am not aware of any other.
Q25 Mr Wright: There are no new RDAs
coming to India?
Mr Whiteway: No. I think at the
moment the RDA presence in India is limited to the three devolved
administrations, each of which has a presence, and of course there
is the British Midlands presence, which is EMDA and Advantage
West Midlands together. Of course, there is also the ThinkLondon
presence in India.
Q26 Mr Wright: On that particular
point on the City of London, do you regard the City of London's
Mumbai office as a good thing? Do you consider that this will
bolster the UKTI City strategy as well as JETCO?
Mr Whiteway: Clearly India is
a priority market for the City strategy under UKTI and therefore
having a presence in that market is likely to assist us to sell
the services of the City to what is a key emerging market and
is clearly helpful.
Q27 Mr Wright: So you regard it as
a positive thing and one that you would certainly have encouraged
if it had not happened?
Mr Whiteway: I think that such
an office clearly can add value, yes.
Q28 Mr Wright: You did mention ThinkLondon's
new office but have the CBI or the British Chamber of Commerce
established India outposts?
Mr Whiteway: I am not aware of
that.
Mr Ahmad: No, they have not as
yet. Certainly the CBI has looked at it on a number of occasions.
They have not ruled it out or in at the moment but it is still
under consideration.
Q29 Mr Wright: Would you consider
that would be confusing with the RDAs as well if they were to
do that?
Mr Ahmad: I think the CBI fulfils
a very different function. The only analogue that I can quote
is their presence in China where they have their own reasons for
dealing with their membership and their queries about sector-specific
things that they want to hear about, and there are a lot of goodwill
visits that are needed by membership of the CBI that they can
handle. In some respects their presence can be a help to UK Trade
and Investment. I do not think the CBI and the British Chamber
fulfil a role that is similar to the one that the RDAs and the
UKTI as a whole undertake.
Q30 Mr Wright: What role would UKTI
play in that activity? Would they be co-ordinating it?
Mr Ahmad: We are very much part
of the same team. If you look at the City strategy as a good example,
the Mumbai Advisory Board consists not only of UK Trade and Investment
but also has representatives from the City, IFSL and others and
the private sector representatives, who individually are part
of the Working Group on financial services and who very much work
together. In many respects our job in post becomes one of facilitation
and co-ordination so we do have a lot of inter-relations with
such organisations.
Q31 Mr Binley: I am very concerned
about dissipating focus, about messing up branding and confusing
people, quite frankly. The more separate bodies we have selling
separate areas of the country can create an even greater mess
if we are not careful. Are you worried about that particular aspect?
Mr Whiteway: We fully understand
the Committee's concerns on this issue, and of course you will
be aware of the two reviews that were launched as a result of
the UKTI five-year strategy in July 2006. Those reviews are looking
at issues such as the avoidance of duplication, at improved co-ordination,
at promoting better value for money on the part of the representation
by the RDAs in markets and they are proceeding according to the
original schedule. We will be announcing the results of those
reviews shortly. When we do so we would be delighted to share
them with the Committee.
Q32 Mr Binley: I think that is important.
Just a very quick one about money because it all comes from the
same pocket, the taxpayer's pocket. You are taking that into account
too, are you, the money we are spending and the impact we are
getting in terms of segregation of focus?
Mr Whiteway: As I said earlier,
what we are looking at is trying to achieve best value for money,
and insofar as the money comes from the taxpayer the answer is
yes, we are.
Mr Binley: Good. We will look forward
to the report.
Q33 Miss Kirkbride: Mr Whiteway,
I noticed your careful use of language over the role of the RDAs.
I just wonder if you could describe to the Committee what happens
if, for example, your UKTI staff highlight a potential business
opportunity for the UK. Is there then a mad scramble between the
south west, the south east and Northern Ireland as to who is going
to get the business, and then what happens to other areas, which
are not represented, mercifully?
Mr Whiteway: We have a system
in place for sharing leads with our RDA partners. What happens
is if, for example, Delhi pick up a lead they feed it back through
UKTI in London and we have a mechanism by which we share those
leads with our RDA partners. In the first instance we would make
a judgment which RDAs, including, of course, the devolved administrations,
are most likely to be able to fulfil the business drivers identified
by the client, but we would not only advertise those leads to
such RDAs. We would also advertise the leads more widely because
we recognise that there are occasions on which other RDAs may
feel that we have made the wrong judgment. That happens very rarely,
fortunately, but it does happen on occasion. We do not therefore
have a mad scramble. We have other mechanisms in place for regulating
the relationships in-market with RDAs. For example, we have requirements
placed on RDAs to share with us their pursuit lists, which are
the lists of companies that they are actively pursuing in-market.
We have a requirement placed on them to share with us their visit
reports when they go and see an existing investor, for example,
and there are various other transparency requirements. All this
is looked at on an annual basis in a formal process which we call
peer review, which is actually taking place at the moment. That
process has two stages. We look at what is going on in an individual
market such as India, so there are a whole series of bilateral
meetings taking place in India, and we then on a headquarter-to-headquarter
basis review the operation of that particular RDA and DA on a
global basis year by year.
Q34 Miss Kirkbride: When there are
two or more RDAs chasing a piece of business does it ever happen
that they lose it or it does not come to fruition because, after
all, we are a very small country and why should they know the
difference between the south east and south west and what they
have to offer?
Mr Whiteway: We may be a small
country physically but we are the number one destination for FDI
in Europe and we have been for about the last 20 years. I am not
trying to suggest that competition does not present its problems
but we have mechanisms in place to try to minimise those problems
and we have mechanisms in place to make sure that we get the information
from the RDAs that we need in order to put the best possible case
in front of the client. In the case of a UKTI lead, which was
I think what you were referring to originally, this would remain
essentially under UKTI's control. We would go to the RDAs. We
would get the information that we need from them and then UKTI
would put that information back to the client. Where you are dealing
with the case of an RDA that has found the lead, of course, the
situation is a little bit different.
Mark Hunter: I think this is a really
central question that we have touched on here. You paint a picture
in response to Julie's question of this being some sort of serene,
sensible and considered process.
Miss Kirkbride: He is trying hard.
Q35 Mark Hunter: I have to say I
do not find it very convincing, with all due respect. These RDAs
have to justify their existence. They are competitive organisations
and I think some of us just find it difficult to believe that
it is as friendly and constructive a process as the picture you
paint indicates. If it is as good as you say then I also have
a concern because it seems to me that yourselves are effectively
playing God in terms of choosing where you are going to dispense
your favours. I just do not see how this is working on the ground,
given the number of these organisations that are there now. Surely
there has to be an element of duplication because ultimately these
people have to justify their own existence. Whether or not you
feed them the lead, they will be aware of what is going on and
they are going to go after it and chase it. How is that a sensible
use of our resources?
Mr Whiteway: It would be very
presumptuous of us to act as God, of course, and I am not in any
way attempting to suggest that this is a process that proceeds
with the serenity that you hint at. Of course, when you have organisations
that are eager for business and competing you can have on occasion
tensions to resolve but I think on the whole it works pretty well.
The number of difficulties which we have resolved down the line
are not really that great in relation to the total volume of business.
Q36 Chairman: I think this is a subject
to which the new Committee will turn its attention again in painting
a more broad picture, not just in relation to India. I think that
is very likely. Turning to the India British Partnership Network
(which I still think of), now the UK India Business Council, which,
of course, received a significant increase in funding, at least
in part because of this Committee's recommendation, co-ordination
with them is also, I hope, helpful and I hope that role is welcomed
by UKTI, or are there issues that concern you?
Mr Ahmad: Not at all. We have
been fully behind the creation of the UK India Business Council
and we have a dedicated team within UK Trade and Investment that
looks after South Asia and individuals within it have direct responsibility
for our relationship with UKIBC. We see them potentially as an
extension of our own delivery arm in the longer term, as we have
achieved with the China British Business Council.
Q37 Chairman: Do you benchmark their
work against the organisation for the Chinese market?
Mr Ahmad: Very much so. In a way
it is almost like a hockey stick. In the initial period, obviously,
it is about its formative stages and getting its immediate recruitment
process and things up and running.
Chairman: I think this again is an issue
at which the Committee may want to look in the future, looking
outside and at India.
Q38 Roger Berry: What did the recent
visit of Lord Jones to India achieve?
Mr Ahmad: The visit by Lord Jones
was not, of course, his first into India. He has been to India
many times as Director General of the CBI, but in particular he
met with the Indian Minister of State for Law and Justice, furthering
our agenda on the legal sector and arguing for foreign lawyers
to be able to practise in India, and we are making some headway
there. The City was promoted very heavily as part of the visit
and the case for how the UK could work with Mumbai in its ambitions
to become an international financial centre was made, but he added
impetus to our argument that one cannot have a thriving international
financial centre unless all the professional services that surround
banks and insurance companies are there at the same time. That
point was made very convincingly. He also was there for the UK
India business awards, which is now an annual event to recognise
businesses from the UK and India who have made a contribution
to bilateral trade and investment and he met many senior people
from Indian industry, including people from Tata and pharmaceutical
companies like Ranbaxy. A particular area of interest also was
the energy sector with the new round of exploration licences coming
up and he certainly made a very strong pitch for the capabilities
of UK companies. On the whole the visit was part of a package
of ministerial engagement by previous ministers of trade and we
certainly regard that as a process we would want to repeat very
regularly as far as India is concerned.
Q39 Roger Berry: How are the plans
for the PM's visit progressing?
Mr Ahmad: Work is still in hand.
It is very much Number 10's call as to the date but we are still
looking at the early part of 2008 and there will be a very strong
business contingent and agenda as part of the overall visit.
| 
