Examination of Witnesses (Questions 1-68)
BARONESS AMOS
OF BRONDESBURY
AND MR
ASIF AHMAD
21 OCTOBER 2009
Q1 Chairman: Welcome, Baroness Amos
and Mr Ahmad. As I think you probably know, the Chairman of the
Committee, Mike Gapes, has been attending a meeting of European
Union Foreign Affairs Committee chairmen in Stockholm. He is hotfoot
on his way back, and might even appear before the evidence session
finishes, but I have been asked to take the Chair for the time
being. We are very glad that you have come to this pre-appointment
hearing. As I am sure you are aware, we have a difference of view
from the Foreign Office as to the role of this Committee in such
matters. We are firmly of the view that we are entitled to have
pre-appointment hearings when there are political appointments
to high commissions and embassies overseas, whereas the Government's
view is that we should have only post-appointment hearings. I
am glad to say that we have got in by the skin of our teeth with
a pre-appointment hearing, because I understand that you are flying
out to Australia this evening. Anyway, welcome to you. Let me
start with this question. Baroness Amos, we understand that you
were first approached for this post by the Prime Minister's private
secretary in April this year; could you tell us whether you had
at any time previously intimated, indicated or, indeed, requested
that you should be considered for a senior diplomatic appointment?
Baroness Amos:
No, I had not. In fact, some time ago—it must have been
in about 2005—I was approached by officials in the Foreign
Office at that time about whether or not I would consider taking
up a diplomatic post, and at that time I said no. It is not something
I had ever requested.
Q2 Chairman: Between that period
in 2005 and when you got the call from the Prime Minister's private
secretary, you had made no intimation that you would consider
a senior diplomatic appointment?
Baroness Amos: None at all.
Q3 Chairman: So, this came wholly
out of the blue to you?
Baroness Amos: Totally.
Q4 Chairman: Can you therefore tell
the Committee what has now persuaded you to turn your life upside-down
to go off to the other end of the world and take up this appointment?
Baroness Amos: Well, I remember
that when I got the first phone call—I think it was in April—I
said, "Australia? Oh, that sounds really interesting."
I feel that very strongly. I think that Australia is a country
which is looking to the Asia-Pacific, but also to Europe and the
United States. It is at a very interesting point geopolitically.
As the Committee is probably aware, much of my experience is in
Africa and the Caribbean, and a little bit in Europe, so it sounded
like a challenge for me, and I am very interested in learning
through anything that I do. I had had some contact with Australia
and the Australian Government. I supported the Prime Minister
at CHOGM—the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting—in
2002. Initially, I was going because Zimbabwe was going to dominate
the agenda, and I was the Africa Minister, but it also coincided
with the Foreign Secretary's father being very ill and subsequently
dying, so I supported the Prime Minister across all issues at
CHOGM. I worked very closely with the then Australian Foreign
Minister, not just on issues related to that CHOGM, but on Zimbabwe.
Subsequently, when there was the terrorist attack in Bali, as
Consular Minister, I also worked very closely with my Australian
counterpart. It is a country that I don't know well but feel that
I know; there is a very close relationship with the United Kingdom.
I think it is a very exciting country. Prime Minister Rudd is
really trying to position Australia in terms of its global impact,
and I thought it would be a very interesting job to do.
Q5 Chairman: Could you tell
the Committee whether, between the time you received the telephone
call from the Prime Minister's private secretary in April and
your receiving the formal offer of the appointment from the permanent
under-secretary at the Foreign Office in June, you had any interview
or took part in any form of selection process for this appointment?
Baroness Amos: No, I did not.
Q6 Ms Stuart: There seems
to be a strange preponderance of non-career diplomats being sent
to Australia. You are the third or fourth in a row. Do you have
any comments to make as to why Canberra seems to be lending itself
to that approach?
Baroness Amos: It is an interesting
question. I thought about that, and I have actually asked a couple
of people about it. The consensus seems to be that there are very
strong political links, not just in terms of the Australian Labour
party and the British Labour party but also in terms of the major
Opposition party here in the United Kingdom and the major Opposition
party in Australia. Also, given the strength of the historical
relationships, it is an environment that lends itself to a political
appointment, although that in no way takes away from the reality
of a career diplomat also being able to do the role.
Q7 Ms Stuart: I wonder if
I might just jump forward. You mentioned the links between the
Australian Labour party and the British Labour party. If opinion
polls are to be believed, it is not within the realms of the impossible
that there may be a change of Government in this country next
year, which would then affect the argument that there are such
close links between the sister parties. How would you deal with
that position, then?
Baroness Amos: The point that
was made to me, which I think is true, is that the political links
are across the piece. It is not just one party to another. Our
major Opposition party, the Conservatives, have a very close relationship
with their counterparts in Australia, but it is more than that.
I know, for example, that the current Government in Australia
have talked to and have had significant discussions with the Conservative
party here, with David Cameron and the shadow Secretary of State
for Foreign Affairs. I think it's important to remember that,
as a diplomat and as the representative of the United Kingdom,
you are representing the country, not one political party.
Q8 Ms Stuart: So despite the
fact that you are a politician, you would not find it difficult
to represent the Opposition parties.
Baroness Amos: No, I don't think
I would find it difficult. There are a couple of things to remember.
One is that I was Leader of the House of Lords, which works very
differently from the House of Commons. You can't get any business
done in the House of Lords if you don't work on a consensual basis,
so I have always worked very closely with colleagues across the
political parties in the House of Lords. As Secretary of State
for International Development, it was very much an issue where
people worked cross-party, and I think that you can see the result
of that if you look at the policies of the three major parties,
in that they are very closely allied. So I don't think that I
am seen in that sense as partisan.
Q9 Sandra Osborne: Sir John
has already outlined the position of this Committee in relation
to appointments of non-diplomatic people to diplomatic posts.
Do you think that in the future the FCO should outline criteria
for where it is appropriate to appoint non-diplomatic people to
a diplomatic post, and if so, what should those criteria be?
Baroness Amos: I think the first
thing is to recognise that the FCO has very clear criteria for
appointments to senior positions. I have had to look at the core
competences that they ask for in relation to posts at my position,
and I have attended the Foreign Office corporate leadership programme,
which all new heads of mission have to attend. In looking at the
core competences, I have to say to the Committee that, bearing
in mind my experience and background both as an executive and
as a non-executive, and as someone who has worked in the public
sector and who has also been a Minister, I think that I fully
meet the range of competences. In terms of your wider point, which
is whether the Foreign Office should lay down criteria, I think
it would be presumptuous of me to make Foreign Office policy here,
in front of this Committee. But I have no doubt it's something
that the Committee may wish to recommend back to the Foreign Office.
Q10 Sandra Osborne: Yes, we
have raised this frequently with the Foreign and Commonwealth
Office and haven't had a very positive response so far. You hinted
earlier that the fact that there are party political connections
between Australia and the United Kingdom justifies a non-diplomatic
appointment. Are you suggesting that that should be one of the
criteria that the FCO should require?
Baroness Amos: First, can I say
that I don't think that I said that the fact that there are close
political links across the political parties justifies a political
appointment. In seeking to answer a question from another Committee
member, I said that I had thought about the question of why there
had been so many political appointments to Australia. I discussed
this with a number of people and one of the things that cropped
up in those conversations was the existence of very close political
ties between the political parties. In saying that, I don't just
mean party to party, in the sense of the Australian Labour party
to the British Labour party, but there are political conversations
that are happening, for example, between Prime Minister Kevin
Rudd and members of his team and our major Opposition party here
in the UK. So that is one thing that has been raised with me.
Something else that was mentioned was the close historical ties
that we have as nations. The closeness of the relationship and
of our political systems, although they are different, means that
we are able to appreciate and understand them so easily and means
that Australia lends itself to a political appointment. But I
am in no way saying that this justifies a political appointment.
Political appointments are made by the Prime Minister. Our diplomatic
service is primarily a career diplomatic service and, looking
back historically, we have few political appointments.
Q11 Mr Illsley: Bearing in
mind what you have just mentioned about not setting Foreign Office
policy at such an early stage, do you have a view as to whether
there should be a formal assessment of which posts might or might
not be suitable for the appointment of a non-diplomat? Do you
see that, perhaps, the FCO or the Government could assess whether
certain posts are suitable—certain posts probably would
not be suitable—bearing in mind what you said about the
links with Australia? Perhaps you might comment on whether you
would have felt any differently taking up a diplomatic posting,
had it been in a different area.
Baroness Amos: Again, this question
is extremely difficult for me to answer. Having said that, I shall
say two general things, if I may. First, as someone who has been
a Foreign Office Minister, I know that, institutionally, the FCO
does not like political appointments. The Committee, with its
vast experience, will know that our system is not like the systems
in some other countries, where you have a huge turnover of diplomats
if there is a change of Government. It gives our system a certain
amount of stability, which is important. In saying that, it would
be difficult for the FCO as a part of the institutional arm of
Government to be making decisions on behalf of the Prime Minister.
How do you square that circle? Again, the Committee may wish to
make some recommendations on this back to the Prime Minister or
the Foreign Secretary. One is a political route and one is a career
route. The question is how you bring those two together. It may
be that the Foreign Office would not wish to have anything more
formal, bearing in mind the institutional dislike of political
appointments at the outset.
Q12 Mr Purchase: While we
are talking of structures and processes and ways and means, who
will you report to?
Baroness Amos: I will be reporting
to the head of the Asia-Pacific directorate.
Q13 Mr Purchase: Will you
find that a little difficult, after being a Minister of the Crown?
Baroness Amos: I do not think
so. As I said to the Committee right at the beginning, I have
had experience in executive roles and non-executive roles. I have
been a public servant working in local government, with local
councillors. I have been a Minister in Government, working with
civil servants. I think that I am absolutely clear about which
role I am playing at any one time. The advantages of having a
political appointee are about the kind of political antennae you
have and the political messaging, so you can perhaps have a closer
relationship with politicians, of whatever party or country, and
are able to feed some of the nuances back. I have spoken with
the last four high commissioners to Australia, three of whom were
from outside the Foreign Office and the last two being political
appointees, and they have talked about that.
Q14 Mr Moss: Following on
from your comments that political appointments are not favoured
by the Foreign Office, according to your own experience of working
there, it is not only the Foreign Office that takes objections
to these things sometimes. Paul Whiteman, who is a spokesman for
the civil service union, the First Division Association, takes
great exception to these things as well. He has said: "The
FDA has assiduously campaigned for appointments to be made on
the basis of merit following a process of open competition. We
believe that this is the only way to avoid accusations of cronyism.
The Government is very keen for top jobs to be open to candidates
from outside the civil service and we welcome the diversity that
openness brings. However, such appointments can only be seen to
be fair if there is open competition between internal and external
candidates." Do you wish that perhaps you had been part of
an open competition situation, and did you ever ask for that to
be the case in your appointment?
Baroness Amos: I did not ask for
that to be the case, as I was aware that I was being appointed
by the Prime Minister. I have absolutely no problem with going
through open processes. Had I been asked whether I was interested
in a particular country and whether I wanted to go through a competition,
I would have made a decision and gone through an open competition.
I think that that does not apply in this particular instance,
bearing in mind that the Prime Minister, within the terms of the
Act, can make political appointments to our diplomatic service.
Q15 Mr Moss: If there had
been open competition for the post, how would you have pitched
your own bid? In other words, what particular qualities would
you have said to the appointing committee you would bring to bear
on this particular appointment?
Baroness Amos: There is my long-standing
experience of working on global issues. There is my leadership
and management experience. I ran a national organisation that
was funded by Government but independent of it, the Equal Opportunities
Commission. The commission had a large budget and I was the accounting
officer. It had offices across the United Kingdom and there was
a big leadership role. There was a huge management role and I
carried out significant change processes in that organisation.
Communication was at the centre of that job, and, of course, it
had a high media profile. In addition to that, I have been a Cabinet
Minister and a Foreign Office Minister. I have been responsible
for the Commonwealth as well as consular matters, both of which
play out in the relationship with Australia. We are building up
our development relationship with that country. I have significant
media experience and I have a lot of experience promoting the
United Kingdom, both as a Foreign Office Minister and elsewhere.
I also have some business experience as a non-executive director.
Q16 Mr Moss: Are you aware
of any opposition to your appointment either within or outside
the Foreign Office?
Baroness Amos: No, I am not, although
I was told that a piece was written in a newspaper about my appointment
and the fact that it was a political one so close to an election.
Q17 Mr Moss: Given the feelings
that you outlined to us within the Foreign Office towards appointments
such as yours, and my quote from the civil service union, do you
not feel that it would have been better for you to have gone through
an open competition situation? Do you think that will be a burden
in terms of doing the job that you have been asked to do?
Baroness Amos: No, I don't, because
I make a very clear distinction between what I was very careful
to describe as an institutional dislike, which I think runs through
the trade unions and the Foreign Office institutionally, and what,
I think, is the different issue of how the Foreign Office actually
manages individuals who are appointed as political appointments.
I think if you spoke to my two immediate predecessors, I am sure
that they would both say that, in terms of the relationships that
they had in Australia and their relationship with the Foreign
Office in the UK, they didn't feel that tension. I have certainly
not felt it. I feel that I have had a lot of support from Foreign
Office colleagues and a lot of warmth expressed to me about my
appointment. So I make a very clear distinction between the institution
as a whole and the individuals in that institution and how they
respond to individual appointments.
Q18 Mr Moss: Has Mr Rudd written
to you?
Baroness Amos: No, he has not
written to me, but he has sent me various messages through others.
Q19 Mr Illsley: You mentioned
a few moments ago that you had taken part in the FCO's corporate
leadership course. I presume that you took part in the crisis
management course as well. How would you assess the usefulness
of those courses in view of your appointment?
Baroness Amos: We, as individuals,
are asked to do an immediate assessment, as it were, after the
course. The corporate leadership programme was particularly helpful
for me in terms of the opportunity to meet colleagues who had
worked in different parts of the world and who will be going to
different countries, to explore together some of the issues that
we face and how we might manage that. There are also within the
course some core elements that relate to organisational practice.
I think that that was less beneficial for me, given my background
in organisational development and organisational management. Some
of the theory had been updated, but I already knew much of it.
The crisis leadership course, which is basically about managing
consular crises, was again useful, particularly as, for some of
it, they put you into managing a real-life crisis situation. For
me, again, it is very interesting because much of what is now
good consular practice—the UK is leading in some of those
areas—is as a direct result of a report that I wrote as
Consular Minister when I returned from Bali, post the Bali bombings.
I identified in that report a number of failings in our system.
In fact, while I was in Bali I publicly apologised, and subsequently
the Foreign Secretary apologised, for the fact that we had not
provided the highest level of service that we could. The changes
that were put in place came as a direct result of that report,
and have been built on over the years.
Q20 Mr Illsley: Bearing in
mind the fact that some of the course that you were just talking
about is now based on your report, do you see any other areas
for improvement?
Baroness Amos: In relation to
consular matters?
Mr Illsley: Either—the corporate
leadership or other matters.
Baroness Amos: Well, I thought
that the consular course was extremely useful, and I thought that
managing a real-life crisis, as it were, was extraordinarily helpful.
Of course, we all hope that we will not face a consular crisis,
but ultimately the proof of that is when you are on the ground
and having to respond quickly. I very much hope that I will not
be in that position, but if I am, I feel that I have been equipped
by the Foreign Office to handle it. On the corporate leadership
programme, the parts that I found the least helpful—it may
be that this becomes more helpful later on—related to some
of the psychometric, personal profiling that is done. You have
to remember that a number of us came together on a course—I
think there were 17 of us—and we were at different stages
of our personal development. Some of it I had done before, and
some of it I had not.
Q21 Mr Purchase: This is on
the question of politics. Should there be a change of Government
here next year, would it not be better for you to offer your notice
and leave in a dignified way, rather than work for a Conservative
Government?
Baroness Amos: No, I don't think
so. I see myself as representing Britain—the United Kingdom—in
Australia. I do not see myself as representing any one political
party and I think that that is really important. As part of my
briefings in the run-up to my departure, I have had conversations
with the shadow Foreign Secretary and the shadow Secretary of
State for International Development. I have had no sense in conversations
during those briefings that my perspective, which is about promoting
and representing Britain in Australia, reflecting back to the
United Kingdom what is happening in Australia, and dealing with
concerns around the key objectives that we are working on together,
is seen as being particularly party political.
Q22 Mr Purchase: But the reason
to appoint a politician to a job such as this—I quite approve
of it, by the way—is because of the political skills and
commitment that they bring to the job. Those in political parties
inevitably believe, even if they probably shouldn't, that their
party represents the best interests of the country that they work
for. People wrestle with this, but is it not pretty straightforward?
If the party that you do not support is now asking you to represent
their interests, I find it a bit hypocritical to stay in post.
Baroness Amos: I would say two
things in relation to that. First, I care passionately that our
country is a democracy, and that means that there can be a change
of Government.
Mr Purchase: But that doesn't mean that
you change sides.
Baroness Amos: May I come on to
my second point? I am someone who has represented the United Kingdom,
and the interests of the United Kingdom, in many different fora
over many years. Yes, I am a Member of the House of Lords in a
period of a Labour Government, but prior to that I represented
the interests of the United Kingdom as the chief executive of
the Equal Opportunities Commission under a Conservative Government.
It is about representing the interests of the country, and I have
absolutely no problem in doing that.
Q23 Mr Purchase: On that narrow
point, if you believe that a particular party, of which you are
a member in a political appointment, represents the best interests
of that country, to be a mere reporter, a mere carrier of news
and information, is not really a role for a politician is it?
Baroness Amos: Well, if the British
people decide that the party that in their view represents the
best interests of the United Kingdom is not the Labour party—
Mr Purchase: That's a Vicar of Bray answer!
Chairman: I'm sorry you were interrupted.
Baroness Amos: I think this is
a point on which we are not going to agree. I really feel very
strongly about this. First, this is a democratic country and it
is for the British people to decide who the Government are. I
really believe that. Secondly, I believe that as a high commissioner
or as an ambassador, you are representing Britain; you are not
representing the interests of one political party.
Q24 Mr Purchase: This is a
political appointment. It has been for the last four people who
have done the job, and—
Baroness Amos: May I just finish?
Chairman: Yes. We will give you the last
word and then we will move on.
Baroness Amos: It is an important
point. Conservative Members of Parliament will visit Australia.
Conservative shadow Ministers will visit Australia. Those Conservative
Members or shadow Ministers will be there talking about the way
that they see Britain and the way that they see British interests.
I have been appointed by a Labour Government but I would have
a role in working with them in the same way as I would have a
very big role in working with Government Ministers or Labour Members
of Parliament. That is the role of an ambassador or a high commissioner.
It is not about representing a narrow interest.
Mr Purchase: It is really.
Baroness Amos: We disagree.
Q25 Chairman: Thank you very
much, Baroness Amos. We will now move on to the possibly calmer
waters of your terms and conditions of appointment. Just before
I bring in Andrew Mackinlay I want to put one question to you.
Are you aware of any features of your terms and conditions taking
up this employment, including your pay, pension and allowance
entitlements, that differ in any way from what they would be if
the post were to be occupied by somebody from the diplomatic service?
Baroness Amos: The only difference
is that my initial appointment is for a year. But I am not aware
of anything else being different.
Chairman: We are going to come to that
point in a moment.
Q26 Andrew Mackinlay: The
tranquil waters—
Baroness Amos: Tranquil waters
from Mr Mackinlay?
Andrew Mackinlay: Yes from me, just for
a minute.
Chairman: That is unusual.
Andrew Mackinlay: It is, and you are
beginning to aggravate me. I notice that Prime Minister Blair
appointed his Conservative pair, Alastair Goodlad, to this post.
That does not make it right, but I think it gives it some balance.
Goodlad was appointed as a Tory MP. But the principle is what
we are examining here. Why on God's earth is the period of appointment
for one year? Why is it until October 2010?
Baroness Amos: That is what I
was offered. I can make assumptions about—
Q27 Andrew Mackinlay: What
are your assumptions? It seems perverse to me.
Baroness Amos: My first assumption
is that—this has been alluded to by other members of the
Committee—bearing in mind that this is a prime ministerial
appointment, the Foreign Office would like to give an incoming
Prime Minister an opportunity to examine any political appointments
within the diplomatic service.
Q28 Andrew Mackinlay: That
makes it a special appointment because an incoming Prime Minister
can—and no doubt has—move career diplomats at his
or her whim. I have to say, I find it worrying in itself that
it should be for only one year. Of course, there is an investment
in you, sending you out there. There has already been some investment
in you, and you will invest your time and energy. If the daft
Foreign Office thinks it can finish in 12 months, it seems to
me that that's a waste of your time, to a large extent, and theirs.
Presumably you have asked why it's just for one year.
Baroness Amos: I have. I can't
say I've received a direct answer, but I think that the answer—
Q29 Andrew Mackinlay: Who
did you ask?
Baroness Amos—but the answer
that I have given you, which relates to the issue of giving a
new Prime Minister choice, is, I think, the predominant view.
Andrew Mackinlay: Who did you ask?
Baroness Amos: I asked within
the Foreign Office.
Q30 Andrew Mackinlay: What,
Mr Ricketts?
Baroness Amos: I did ask the Permanent
Under-Secretary, yes.
Q31 Chairman: Forgive me.
You replied to Andrew Mackinlay saying that you didn't get a direct
answer. Can you just tell the Committee what answer you got to
a very reasonable question? What answer did you get to your question,
"Why have I only been appointed for one year?"
Baroness Amos: That there is going
to be a general election next year, and it's important that any
new Prime Minister has a choice.
Q32 Andrew Mackinlay: I think
it's very candid of you and very fair, because it does raise the
question of whether or not, therefore, the thing is premature.
You can have pro tem arrangements, but that is not a matter
between us; I think it's for the Prime Minister. You were also
candid with us when you said you were approached in 2005 by somebody
who said, "Would you like a diplomatic post?" Who approached
you and what was on offer or what was canvassed?
Baroness Amos: It was the then
Permanent Under-Secretary.
Andrew Mackinlay: Jay.
Baroness Amos: Yes, Sir Michael.
Q33 Andrew Mackinlay: And
what did he offer?
Baroness Amos: They were interested
in whether or not I was in any way interested in South Africa.
Q34 Andrew Mackinlay: Which
is also a political appointment now, of course, recently. Can
I ask you this? You've been very fair. The impression I've got
is that you're looking forward to this post, but that you would
never have applied for the post. We know that they now advertise
posts so that people from outside the FCO career service can apply,
but you wouldn't have ever applied for this post. It was because
you were phoned up and it was offered to you, and a very nice
offer too. That's a fair assessment, is it? It wasn't on your
radar screen to look either for this post or another one?
Baroness Amos: No, and I think
it would be fair to say that as someone who is involved in politics
and has been a Minister, I don't think I would be scanning the
pages to see which diplomatic posts were coming up so that I would
apply. I mean, I am aware that there are occasionally political
appointments. I didn't seek it, but I do think it would be a little
odd if I were opening the pages of The Observer or something
and looking to see.
Q35 Andrew Mackinlay: The
other thing—I thought it was probably unintentional—is
that you seemed a bit ambiguous about whether or not you'd take
leave from the House of Lords, in the sense of the word. Can you
clarify that? It doesn't seem to be a problem. Presumably you
have taken, as of today, leave of absence. Have you?
Baroness Amos: I haven't yet,
but I haven't left yet. It was ambiguous in the sense that when
I sent my evidence in, I had not taken that step.
Q36 Andrew Mackinlay: So when
do you become high commissioner, and when would you seek leave
of absence?
Baroness Amos: I leave this evening.
Andrew Mackinlay: Yes, but it must be
when you hand your credentials in.
Baroness Amos: You don't hand
in credentials in the same way, because Australia is a realm.
I will take a letter to the Prime Minister. But I was making it
absolutely clear to the Committee that I have absolutely no intention
of participating in the work of the House of Lords. It would be
inappropriate to do so.
Q37 Andrew Mackinlay: Indeed
it would, but I really cannot understand your hesitation on this.
It is a constitutionally very important point. Unless you take
leave of absence, you are unambiguously still a Member of Parliament,
the legislature, which is unusual even for diplomatic appointments.
I can't understand why, this very afternoon, you're not taking
leave of absence. If you're going in the next few days, can you
tell us? Otherwise, you're going to be High Commissioner and a
member of the United Kingdom legislature, as distinct from your
former colleague, who went off to Brussels. The former ambassador
to South Africa left the House of Commons. Helen Liddell, your
predecessor, had left the House of Commons. What's the problem?
Unless or until you take leave of absence, you are going to be
a member of the United Kingdom legislature and High Commissioner.
That is correct, isn't it?
Baroness Amos: Yes, but there
is not a hesitation—
Andrew Mackinlay: Why aren't you going
to take leave of absence? That is a formulation, isn't it? It's
a formal thing.
Baroness Amos: I am going to take
leave of absence, I was just—
Q38 Andrew Mackinlay: When?
Baroness Amos: I was just saying
to you that I have not yet formally written the little letter
that says, I am taking—
Andrew Mackinlay: When?
Baroness Amos: I will do it before
I leave this evening.
Q39 Andrew Mackinlay: Oh,
that's fine. Good. Thank you. Are there any other contractual
things still to be explored or examined with the Government for
you?
Baroness Amos: Not as far as I
am aware.
Andrew Mackinlay: Thank you.
Q40 Ms Stuart: May I take
you back to that exchange about why the contract was only open
for one year? I seem to recall that there is a convention that
when a political appointment is made, Leaders of the Opposition
are consulted on it, so, rather than having the freedom, the Opposition
agree to it and therefore an incoming new Administration, by implication.
Have you asked whether the Leader of the Opposition has been consulted
about your appointment?
Baroness Amos: Before my appointment
was announced, I asked that question. My understanding is that—I
know that the Foreign Secretary's office contacted his opposite
number. Whether the Leader of the Opposition has been contacted,
I cannot answer. I have actually spoken to and had a meeting with
the shadow Foreign Secretary at which we talked about the general
relationship with Australia.
Q41 Ms Stuart: Did you get
a sense of whether your appointment met with their approval?
Baroness Amos: May I answer that
another way? I got no sense that my appointment created any difficulties
or was a problem.
Q42 Mr Horam: Baroness Amos,
you were very candid in your first response to the Chairman, when
you said that your previous interests in the world and countries
of the world had been in the Caribbean, Africa and India—I
think you mentioned those three—not in Australia.
Baroness Amos: Not in Australia
specifically. I have a general interest in Asia-Pacific—
Mr Horam: We all have an interest in
the world.
Baroness Amos: My particular expertise
is in Africa and the Caribbean.
Q43 Mr Horam: Let me remind
you: in Dod's Parliamentary Companion you listed your interests
as Sub-Saharan Africa, the Caribbean, China and India. That is
fair, is it?
Baroness Amos: Yes.
Q44 Mr Horam: As I understand
it, you have no previous experience as a career diplomat.
Baroness Amos: No, none.
Q45 Mr Horam: We heard what
you said about the institutional dislike at the Foreign Office
for the appointment of politicians to these posts. Have you been
elected to anything?
Baroness Amos: No.
Mr Horam: One thing that is obvious about
Australia is that it is a very vibrant democracy; so you have
never been elected to anything?
Baroness Amos: No.
Q46 Mr Horam: Are you keen
on cricket?
Baroness Amos: On drinking?
Mr Horam: Cricket.
Baroness Amos: Yes, I am keen
on cricket.
Mr Horam: Well, we have found some connection
between you and Australia.
Baroness Amos: I think that there
are many others.
Mr Horam: As far as I can see, you are
uniquely unqualified for this job: you are not a career diplomat,
you had no previous interest in this part of the world and you
have never been elected, but you are interested in cricket—that's
good.
Baroness Amos: In some ways you
could turn that around and say that I am uniquely qualified, if
you look at how the Foreign Office generally operates.
Q47 Mr Horam: You really do
think ignorance is a qualification for most diplomatic appointments?
Baroness Amos: Well, no. It is
not so much ignorance, but the Foreign Office is a service that
operates on the basis that people are moved around to get experience
of working in different environments, and I certainly have that.
Q48 Mr Horam: Why do you think
that you were appointed, given that you seem to be uniquely unqualified?
Baroness Amos: I don't agree that
I am uniquely unqualified.
Mr Horam: My question is, why do you
think that you were appointed?
Baroness Amos:
You asked me why I was appointed given that I was "uniquely
unqualified". Can I say, I do not think that I am uniquely
unqualified? I am not sure whether members of the Committee have
looked at the competences that the Foreign Office look for at
this level of appointment; I have. The competences do not in any
way reflect a specific geographic expertise; they are a range
of competences of communication, leadership and being able to
work with others. I have substantial experience of those competences.
In addition, I have substantial experience of foreign affairs,
which anyone in the Foreign Office would also have. I was appointed
on the basis of my leadership and management experience, of my
knowledge of the workings of global issues and of my ability to
communicate and represent British interests.
Q49 Mr Horam: Do you think
that those qualities would be evident in lots of other people?
We are talking about a specific post in Australia. They are admirable
qualities, which I am sure you possess. I have no reason to doubt
that you possess them, but are they not the generalised qualities
that many other people would possess?
Baroness Amos: I am not sure that
many people would possess them. Some people would possess some
of them, but not necessarily that range of competences together.
Some people may be strong in four of the seven or in six of the
seven. I feel that I am strong in all seven of them.
Q50 Mr Horam: Is that why
you feel that these general qualities that you have—I do
not dispute that—are the reason why you were appointed to
the job in Australia?
Baroness Amos: Yes, the qualities
that I would bring to the role are the reason why I was appointed.
Q51 Mr Purchase: Moving on
a little further, you will be completely familiar—certainly
more than I am—with the joint statement issued by Prime
Ministers Brown and Rudd on the strengthening of the strategic
partnership. What do you anticipate to be the key issues in the
UK-Australian relationship over the next few years? Are you allowed
to take into this job any personal priorities and points of friction
that you can foresee between our two countries?
Baroness Amos: The key issues
have been the key issues over the last couple of years. The first
set of key issues are around the global relationship—a global
partnership on issues such as defence, security and intelligence.
I am thinking particularly of defence: issues around Afghanistan
and our close relationship with Australia in respect of that.
As part of my pre-posting briefing, I talked to NATO about the
Australian contribution, some of the issues and a little bit of
the friction around that. There is the big issue of climate change
in the run-up to Copenhagen but, beyond Copenhagen, as the Committee
will know, the Australian Government are seeking to put through
some legislation, which is currently stalled. Trade and investment
are a huge part of the relationship, and one of the things that
UK Trade & Investment has been keen to do is not only promote
British companies wanting to invest in Australia, but assist Australian
companies wanting to invest in the United Kingdom. As part of
that, helping British companies to work with Australian counterparts
on breaking into the market with China is very important, as,
obviously, are consular issues and the welfare of British citizens
who travel to Australia. We also have a significant population
of British people resident in Australia. Again, I have talked
to VisitBritain and others about that relationship. On your point
about whether there is any opportunity to bring in personal interests,
I think that there will be some opportunity. Obviously I will
know more about that once I have spent some time actually doing
the role. In terms of areas of friction, there are some niggles,
but they do not tend to be on the major issues. Fiji, for example,
is one area and pensions is another. Members of the Australian
Government have been very keen to push the United Kingdom Government
to uprate social security pensions because they are "frozen"
for those citizens who have chosen to move to Australia. There
is a little bit of a niggle about the relationship with NATO,
which is not about the United Kingdom, but about how Australia
feels that it is treated as the largest non-contributing nation
to the NATO force. It wants to be involved in key decisions, which
are very often taken by NATO-only countries.
Q52 Mr Purchase: When our
country voted yes in 1975 and then, by implication—or extension—no
to a continuing role in respect of Commonwealth trade, Australia
sensibly and necessarily looked elsewhere for partners. That has
developed over any number of years now on the Pacific rim. Do
you think that it should be part of UKTI's idea that it should
drive ahead in Australia, or should we take it as a bit of a lost
cause now?
Baroness Amos: I do not agree
that it is a lost cause. There are two different things here.
There are the companies operating at a global level, if you like—the
big multinationals, and I have been to see a number of them—but
there are also a number of small and medium-sized enterprises.
I went to the big defence exhibition that was held at the ExCel
centre and met representatives from three or four companies that
are working in a niche market, have significant investment on
the defence side in Australia and are very much valued. Think
London hosted a dinner for me, and I met a number of Australian
companies that are doing the same thing the other way. I think
we all accept that we live in a global world and that there are
particular areas of expertise that can be exported. It is important
that British companies are part of that process.
Q53 Mr Purchase: Prime Ministers
Brown and Rudd seem to have hit it off pretty well. Can their
friendship be used in aid of British trade opportunities in Australia?
Do you see a programme of ministerial visits at different levels
to assist us in that direction?
Baroness Amos: It would be wonderful
to have a programme of ministerial visits. I am unlikely to have
a programme of ministerial visits between now and the general
election, but I think there will some visits by some pretty senior
civil servants on a range of issues between now and early next
year. Those will help to put our agenda forward.
Q54 Mr Illsley: You briefly
touched on the consular aspect of your work. Are there any consular
issues that stand out at the moment which you feel will be a major
part of your work?
Baroness Amos: No, I had a briefing
with our consular team here. The numbers are high. We have good
consular staff in Australia. Much of the work is to do with people
losing things, or drinking too much and getting into trouble.
There have been one or two very high-profile cases in Australia,
the most recent of which was the young man who got lost. Going
back a few years, there was the horrible Falconio case. However,
those are exceptions rather than the rule.
Q55 Sandra Osborne: With regard
to Australia's role in Afghanistan, how do you envisage the UK-Australian
co-operation developing in light of the new national security
partnership that has been suggested?
Baroness Amos: There are a couple
of things—three elements, if you like. Our defence people
work very closely together. As part of that, they train together
and exchanges happen in each of the forces. Linked to that and
to the Defence White Paper, which has been produced by the Australians,
is development over the next few years, including procurement.
As part of that process, our defence sales people are working
very closely with our Australian counterparts. There is a very
close and dynamic relationship that goes from navy to navy, army
to army and air force to air force. Secondly, we have a strong
intelligence relationship, which will continue. Linked to that
are the measures that both our countries are putting in place
in terms of counter-terrorism. We look to Australia particularly
in relation to some of the difficulties that it faces in its neighbourhood,
if I may put it in those terms—some of the issues around
Indonesia and the recent bombings where Australia was specifically
targeted. The relationship is very strong and will continue. Our
Australian colleagues have been looking to us, at some of the
work that we have been doing around domestic terrorism, which
they themselves are beginning to confront. The Committee will
know about the arrest of the Somalis in Melbourne, which related
back to the bombings in Indonesia. So, you have defence, you have
intelligence linked to counter-terrorism and, more broadly, on
the security agenda there are some of the issues that we haven't
really talked about in much depth, such as the role that Australia
plays in the Pacific region in particular, and the support that
the UK gives on that; it is a region where we are not particularly
active.
Q56 Sandra Osborne: Do you
think that the security concerns in the neighbourhood could result
in a new set of architecture for security issues, more so than
exists at the moment?
Baroness Amos: If you look at
the forums that currently exist in the Asian region, none focuses
on security issues. That is one of the things that Prime Minister
Rudd has been keen to develop through a forum that he has talked
about establishing. There is to be a meeting in the margins of
ASEAN later this year in relation to that. Certainly in terms
of pushing that forward, my impression from what I've read and
the people I've spoken to is that that will take a long time to
establish itself, if it does at all. There is a great deal of
work to be done on building the relationships so that people in
the region see the benefits of having another forum.
Sandra Osborne: Thank you.
Q57 Chairman: Baroness Amos,
you said that Australia is in this somewhat anomalous position:
it makes a very significant contribution in Afghanistan—indeed,
greater than that made by many NATO member states—but, as
a partnership country as opposed to a NATO member state, it feels
excluded from some of the key decision-making areas. Could you
tell us whether that feeling of exclusion, which it is trying
to rectify, relates to the structures in Kabul, Tampa or Brussels—or
possibly all three?
Baroness Amos:
My impression, having spoken to some Australian colleagues on
this matter but having also been to Brussels and talked to NATO
colleagues, as well as having talked to colleagues here, is that
it is much more focused on NATO and the NATO structures in Brussels.
Q58 Mr Illsley: Will you expand
a little on what you touched on earlier about climate change?
In particular, how close is Australia's position to that of the
UK in advance of Copenhagen? How close are the negotiating positions
of the two countries? Also, how are we working together, bearing
in mind that there was a declaration of a partnership in 2008
between our two Prime Ministers? How close are the two countries
in working towards the Copenhagen summit?
Baroness Amos: We are working
extremely closely together. Our negotiating positions are very
close. It would be true to say that Australia, as a resource-rich
country, has some challenges that are not quite the challenges
that we in the United Kingdom face. Having said that, however,
the intention of the Australian Government in relation to these
issues is very similar to that of the UK Government. Obviously,
in terms of working through international fora, we have close
relationships with some people and the Australians have some close
relationships with some people, so it is quite important that
we are able to work with our partners and then come back and talk
about where we are. In terms of related issues, if you like, there
is a great deal of work going on at the moment on the issue of
carbon capture and storage. Australia is putting together some
demonstration projects in relation to that. It has got its legislation
through in relation to renewables, but there is still the outstanding
legislation that they are hoping to get through in November.
Q59 Mr Illsley: Is that legislation
in relation to the cap and trade issue?[1]
Baroness Amos: Yes.
Q60 Mr Illsley: Given the
situation with the Barrier Reef, you would have thought that the
Australians would have had a greater desire to achieve that legislation.
Baroness Amos: Again, it is interesting.
There is a coalition within the Australian Parliament that has
voted against that legislation, which is why it was not passed.
However, major industry and the NGOs are very much pro the legislation
and the political indicators seem to be that the legislation will
go through next time. I will have a better sense of that when
I am there.
Q61 Chairman: As High Commissioner,
like every other high commissioner and ambassador that we have,
the promotion of British trade interests will be a major part
of your responsibilities and no doubt will take up a lot of your
time. Can you tell us what you see, at the very start of your
appointment, as the most promising areas for the expansion of
British trade and British exports to Australia at the present
time?
Baroness Amos: It is important
to tell the Committee that I have spoken to about 20 companies
as part of my preparation. The multinationals have particular
issues and have their own relationships. On the whole, what they
are looking for from the High Commission is not necessarily so
much about access, although in one or two cases we did talk about
access. However, it is very much about visibility and about being
able to demonstrate that they have a close relationship. The small
and medium-sized enterprises, particularly the ones involved in
defence sales, have different needs. They are trying to break
into a market. They very often have niche products. Very often,
they want to partner with an Australian entity or counterpart,
so it is very much about opening doors and giving them access
and advice. In terms of the areas, they span a range of areas.
The companies that I have spoken to have tended to be much more
in the defence sales area, although there are companies that go
much wider than that.
Q62 Andrew Mackinlay: From
my recollection, the trade network of the United Kingdom across
Australia is somewhat patchy as—I put this in parenthesis—are
consular services. I hope for correction from you here, but we
have no presence as such over in Perth and—I am struggling
here—probably other states. There is a problem, isn't there?
Baroness Amos: Shall I help you
with where the network is? The main office is in Canberra, the
second biggest office is in Sydney and the third biggest office
is in Melbourne, then Perth and Brisbane. Perth and Brisbane are
run locally; the heads of the Melbourne and Sydney offices are
UK-based staff. We do not have an office in Adelaide, but we have
an honorary consul.
Q63 Andrew Mackinlay: Do you
see a problem there, looking at it? I realise that perhaps I should
ask you in a year's time, after you have had some experience.
Baroness Amos: I would prefer
you to ask me in a year's time—perhaps you can find out
whether my contract is being renewed at the same time. I have
had no sense, talking to anyone, that there is a feeling that
the network is wrong or that we need more resources in places
where we are not currently represented. That has not been brought
to me, and I have spoken to a lot of people between my appointment
being announced and now. So, I have no sense of that, but obviously
that is something that I shall be open to when I am in post.
Q64 Andrew Mackinlay: We are
now down to completely another area. Have you had an opportunity
of meeting the Deputy Head of Mission and to have worked out any
modus vivendi? He or she, by definition, is a career diplomat.
Could you tell us about that kind of relationship? What thought
have you given to it?
Baroness Amos: I visited Australia
for a week at the end of August. I met the Deputy Head of Mission,
the First Secretary, the person who is going to be my new PA and
so on. The Deputy Head of Mission has been very much involved
in managing the mission since Helen Liddell left—between
that time and my arrival.
Q65 Andrew Mackinlay: She
has gone?
Baroness Amos: Yes. The total
will be about three weeks, by the time that I start. We have not
sat down and discussed how we are going to work together. I think
that is an early conversation when I get there, but it was not
an appropriate conversation for me as a visitor, with Helen Liddell
still in post.
Q66 Sandra Osborne: Given
that you have not even started yet, I am beginning to feel that
we are asking you everything but what you are going to have for
your dinner tomorrow night. Have you had the opportunity to have
any discussions about the rather sensitive issue of former child
migrants to Australia? The Health Committees in the House of Commons
and in the Australian Senate have looked at the issue. I wonder
if you are aware of any action that has been taken by the UK Government
to support former child migrants.
Baroness Amos: I have not had
an opportunity for anything in depth on this. I have spoken to
the Deputy Head of Mission, who was required to speak to Sky News,
which was putting together a programme that is to be shown later
in the year. Of course I am aware of the announcement by the Australian
Government, that they would be looking to do some kind of apology
by the end of the year. I have read a little around the issue.
My understanding is that the announcement was made in the context
not only of child migrants but also in respect of children who
had been abused in institutions in Australia. There is not necessarily
a link between the two, but there can be some overlap with child
migrants and what are called the forgotten children. The Australian
Government have gone out consulting on this before they make any
kind of formal apology. This is an issue that has been raised
with our own Department of Health, and I know that the Secretary
of State is aware of these issues, although I have not actually
spoken to him about it. What we, as the UK Government, will do
at the end of the year is something that is now being actively
considered within the Government, and obviously there will be
consultation with the Australian Government too.
Q67 Mr Moss: I would like
to come in on this issue. I have a constituent who was one of
these child migrants, and she went through a traumatic time in
Australia; she is now back in the UK, of course. I have been working
on her behalf for about a decade now. Hopes were raised when the
Australian Government said that they were setting aside a sum
of money. But the latest reports are that they are going to reduce
the payments to the individuals. You have not taken up the job
yet, but do you see your role as being supportive of the UK children
who went to Australia, many of whom are back here now, and supporting
the original claim? Can you give an assurance that you will be
fighting for their rights against what the Australians deem as
necessary to pay out?
Baroness Amos: I will say three
things in relation to that. First, as I said, I have read up a
little about this, but I do not feel that I am fully briefed on
the issue. Therefore, I will be very guarded, if I may, in what
I say. I need to ensure that I am fully and 100% briefed. It is
the end of October, and this issue will run between now and December—and
beyond, I am sure. I think part of my responsibility will of course
be to represent to the Australian Government the force of any
argument from a British perspective, not only with respect to
individuals, but with respect to any policy implications of how
we see this issue unfolding. The third thing is that I will of
course have to represent back to the UK what I hear from Australian
colleagues, and, if there needs to be further lobbying, what the
points of contact in relation to that might be.
Q68 Chairman: Baroness Amos,
I have one final question. As you go on to the plane tonight with,
no doubt, voluminous FCO lines to take on all the key issues,
will you tell us what the FCO has said to you as to the line to
take when you are asked, as you surely will be at an early date,
what the British position is on the possibility, theoretical or
not, of the Australian people deciding to have an Australian elected
head of state rather than Her Majesty the Queen?
Baroness Amos: That is a matter
for the people of Australia.
Chairman: That is exactly the reply that
I have written down here, but I am glad to have that on the record.
Baroness Amos, thank you very much indeed for coming to our pre-appointment
hearing. On all sides of the Committee, we wish you every success
in discharging your very important responsibilities in Canberra
for at least a year and whatever may lie beyond.
Baroness Amos: Thank you very
much, and I will be delighted to come back if the Committee will
like to see me later.
1 Note by witness: The legislation is actually
on Emissions Trading. Back
| 
