Letter from the Head, Parliamentary Relations
Team, Foreign and Commonwealth Office to the Second Clerk of the
Committee
FCO DEPARTMENTAL REPORT 2006-07: QUESTIONS
FROM THE FAC
Thank you for your letter of 26 March informing
me that the Foreign Affairs Committee has now considered the Government's
response to the Committee's Report on the FCO's Annual Report
2006-07. In your letter you raised some additional questions about
our response.
Taking these in order:
COMPREHENSIVE SPENDING
REVIEW SETTLEMENT
The Committee notes the Government's response
that the FCO's CSR baseline sums excluded RfR2 for Conflict Prevent,
together with in-year claims against the DEL Reserve, and that
this followed "standard Treasury practice". The Committee
is interested to know why conflict prevention is treated as one-off
or time-limited expenditure, given that the FCO will spend on
conflict prevention every year.
The 2007 CSR provided funds over the CSR07 period
for a merged conflict prevention pool, bringing together the Africa
and Global Conflict Prevention Pools. This funding now sits within
the Department for International Development's CSR settlement,
but as before is subject to joint control by DfiD, FCO and MOD.
Budgets for peacekeeping operations—both multilateral and
bilateral—are agreed annually between the Foreign Secretary
and the Chief Secretary to the Treasury due to their volatility.
The FCO receives this funding in RfR2 in-year through claims on
the Reserve.
NEW STRATEGIC
FRAMEWORK
The Committee notes that the Government will be
allocating additional resources to its four new policy goals and
that this will mean reducing "the resources the FCO puts
into certain other issues [|] in particular in the areas of sustainable
development, science and innovation, and crime and drugs".
The Committee would like details of the level of reductions in
these and any other areas and assessment of the impact they will
have.
As the Committee is aware, the FCO intends to
substantially increase the overall level of resources it puts
into counter-terrorism and counter-proliferation; climate change,
Afghanistan and other conflict regions, and key international
institutions. In order to put more resources into these new priority
areas, and to sharpen our strategic focus, Ministers decided to
reduce resources into other issues, notably the environmental
aspects of sustainable development, science and innovation, and
crime and drugs.
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
(SD)
Sustainable Development remains an important
concept and much of the work on our new policy goals will contribute
to the Government's overall SD goals. Our Posts abroad will continue
to work on SD in countries where this is a priority. But in terms
of policy making in London, this was an area where the FCO risked
duplicating the work already being done by DEFRA who takes the
lead on the UK's SD dialogues with Brazil, China, India, Mexico
and South Africa. It has therefore been agreed that DEFRA will
take responsibility for the international as well as domestic
policy making, working directly with Posts in taking the dialogues
forward. The FCO will focus its resources on promoting a "Low
Carbon High Growth" Global Economy, where there is more scope
for the FCO to make a real difference and add greatest value.
And our contribution to the Overseas Territories Environmental
Programme will continue to support protection of the environment
in the Overseas Territories (£500,000 per annum allocated),
as will our work on International Environmental Governance and
sustainable forest management.
As a consequence, we have wound up our small
six-person team working on the environmental aspects of sustainable
development. The Global Opportunities Fund -Sustainable Development
programme (£1.45 million in 2007-08) will also be phased
out. Spending in 2008-09 will reduce to £440,000 to enable
a number of multi-year projects to be completed, thereby maximising
the impact of earlier investment.
DRUGS AND
CRIME
The FCO's Drugs and International Crime Department
(DICD) will co-ordinate the FCO's contribution to the government-wide
objectives of fighting drugs and international crime by tasking
our posts which are key to the delivery of those goals. And where
FCO assets are needed to create the necessary political will or
overcome obstacles to bilateral operational cooperation between
our law enforcement agencies, we will continue to offer that support,
tasking our staff and posts to provide political reporting and
to maintain key relationships. The changes mean that the FCO will
no longer co-ordinate the UK's international efforts on drugs
and crime: that role will be taken over by the Home Office but
the FCO will continue to advise on and contribute to policy formulation.
Drugs & International Crime Department (DICD) will reduce
in size from 18 members of staff to 9 by September 2008.
DICD will continue to supervise our Drugs &
Crime Programme which will be reduced from £6 million in
2007-08 to £3 million/£2 million/£2 million over
the CSR period.
SCIENCE AND
INNOVATION
The work of the Science and Innovation Network
makes an important contribution to the UK's science base and to
the future prosperity of the UK. It also supports key policy objectives,
such as combating dangerous climate change. The Network will be
maintained at its current level for the period covered by the
Comprehensive Spending Review. However, funding and management
arrangements will change to reflect the importance of the Network
to its stakeholders in the UK. As outlined in the joint memo sent
to the Chairman of the DIUS Committee on 13 March, the FCO has
agreed with the Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills
(DIUS), the lead Government Department for science and innovation,
that it will in future manage the Science and Innovation Network
and contribute to its funding.
As a result of this decision, the FCO's Science
and Innovation Group will transfer to DIUS during the first half
of the financial year. The FCO will transfer around £240k
to DIUS to contribute to the administrative costs of the Group.
The Group will be responsible for recruitment and tasking of the
network. Science and Innovation Officers will, however, continue
to be employed by the FCO on FCO terms and conditions.
The estimated costs of the network are approximately
£5.4 million (direct costs) or £8.3 million (full economic
costs). The FCO will cover 100% of the costs of the network in
2008-09. Under the new arrangements DIUS will contribute 25 per
cent of the direct costs of the network in 2009-10 and 50% in
2010-11 (currently estimated at £1.35 million and £2.7
million). This programme resource will be transferred to the FCO
in each of those years.
The FCO provided £1.3 million from the
Global Opportunities Fund to support projects run by the Network
in 2007-08. This will fall to £1 million in 2008-09 and £500k
in 2009-10 and zero in 2010-11. DIUS will provide additional programme
funding of £800k in 2009-10 and £1.3 million in 2010-11.
These funds will be managed by the Science and Innovation Group
in DIUS. The FCO will maintain an interest in Science Policy.
PSA TARGETS
What progress is being made on developing indicators
for the Conflict PSA and for the PSAs to which the FCO is a major
contributor?
CONFLICT PSA
Work on PSA 30, "Reduce the impact of conflict
through enhanced UK and international efforts" (on which
the FCO leads) is advancing well. We are close to completing the
design of a set of detailed and rigorous targets that will help
us measure our efforts against the four indicators of the PSA.
These are being agreed across Whitehall. Once finalised, they
will be presented to the PSA Delivery Board and also submitted
to the Treasury. The Prime Minister's Delivery Unit (PMDU) will
undertake a baseline assessment of HMG's ability to deliver the
PSA. This review is designed to strengthen delivery from the outset
of the CSR period and will cover the work of the FCO, MOD, DfID
and the Stabilisation Unit.
Other PSAs for which the FCO is a key Delivery Partner
The FCO continues to make good progress in helping
to shape the indicators of the PSAs for which we are a delivery
partner (Counter Terrorism, Climate Change, Migration, and Poverty
Reduction). The PSAs are at a stage where they are either in the
process of being finalised, or being formally agreed and signed
off by the Prime Minister's Delivery Unit. The indicators within
each PSA, and for which the FCO will be held accountable for delivery,
will be consistent with the recently published outcomes in our
internal DSO framework.
SHARED SERVICES
PROGRAMME
We appreciate the Committee's continued interest
in the work of the Shared Services Programme. The Programme is
the largest, most complex and in some ways most challenging of
the FCO's change programmes. Transforming the way in which we
deliver our corporate services is vital if we are to achieve our
overall aim of a modernized FCO with more of our staff delivering
our policy goals and serving the Public. Given the overall importance
of the Programme to the FCO we invited the OGC to conduct a Gateway
0 Review during April.
Overall the OGC gave the Programme a Red (take
immediate action) rating. Such a rating is not unusual at this
stage of a complex transformational change programme. The overall
rating reflects the highest rating of the individual recommendations.
Of the 10 recommendations, three were rated Red. These three recommendations
focus on the shape of the Programme, its governance and the need
to establish an "Intelligent Client" Function for the
North West Europe Facilities Management contract. We welcome the
OGC's report and are taking action on it. We are strengthening
the leadership of the Programme under a more Senior Director.
He and his team will review the Programme in light of the OGC's
findings. We will keep the Committee informed of the results.
LANGUAGE TRAINING
What feedback has the FCO received from staff
who have begun courses under the new outsourced language training
Framework Agreements? Can the FCO provide the Committee with details
of the system of quality control built into the Agreements?
All students are asked to complete feedback
forms on their training. Using a rating scale of 1-6 (1 = unacceptable,
6 = Excellent). For those that have been trained so far under
the new framework the feedback results are:
82% of students gave an overall rating of 4 or
higher for their language course
93% of students gave a rating of 4 or higher
for course content, objectives etc
86% of students gave a rating of 4 or higher
for lesson structure, pace of course, group dynamics
86% of students gave a rating of 4 or higher
for their progress against course objectives
75% of students gave a rating of 4 or higher
for facilities (eg. teaching rooms, equipment, library etc).
On the second part of your question, the FCO
has set in place the following arrangements to ensure that quality
and value for money is maintained:
— A mini competition is run for each
new course amongst the suppliers that were successful for provision
of that particular language. There are 2-6 different language
training providers for each of the 60 main FCO languages to allow
for flexibility in supply, maintaining quality at a reasonable
price. The criteria for selection of the most suitable supplier
are the following: capability to deliver (eg. availability of
required teachers within the specified time framework), academic
quality (teachers' CVs are scrutinised, trial lessons and lesson
observations take place, and submission of sample lesson plans
are required) and price.
— Language tuition quality is monitored
through the following:—teachers' progress reports, feedback
from students (questionnaires are completed at fixed points in
the course), lesson observations, and exam results. The Common
European Framework for Languages has been adopted by the FCO to
define learning outcomes so providers are clear what students
are expected to achieve.
— Best practice is developed through
FCO membership of the UK Inter-Departmental Standing Committee
on Languages and key language standards bodies (ALTE, EALTA and
ILTA, CILT, ALL and AULC). The Chartered Institute of Linguistics
co-issues examination certificates of FCO Confidence and Operational
levels of examinations, and conducts scrutinies and audits of
the examination processes.
FCO ESTATE IN
DUBLIN
The Committee would like a direct response to
its recommendation that the FCO should give a public update on
its latest plans for the Ambassador's residences in Dublin. The
Committee would also like to know who was responsible for taking
the decision to purchase Marlay Grange when it had not been possible
to carry out an invasive survey.
In October Peter Ricketts wrote to the Committee
on a confidential basis about the issues the FCO faces on the
Dublin estate. The letter explained that much of the detail is
commercially sensitive and, if disclosed, would damage our ability
to obtain best value for money for the taxpayer. This remains
the position and the FCO cannot disclose in public those full
details. Our public position remains as set out in the Government's
response to the Committee's report on the FCO's 2006-07 Annual
Report.
The decision to acquire Marlay Grange was taken
by Ministers on the advice of officials. As the NAO noted in their
report, prior to purchasing Marlay Grange we identified that a
substantial programme of works, estimated at £2.8 million,
would be necessary. Following the comprehensive survey, it was
found that the cost of works to upgrade the property would be
£3.7 million. This was largely due to changes to the refurbishment
specifications rather than as a result of the presence of asbestos,
which cost £120,000 to remove.
MANAGEMENT INFORMATION
On Management Information, the Committee indicated
that it welcomed the Government's offer to share the following:
— Details of the estates security
programme for the CSR 07 period
The key drivers behind the projects that make
up the FCO's capital programme are business performance, health
and safety issues and security considerations. The programme is
regularly reviewed to take account of any reprioritisation of
resources and changes in project schedules. The enclosed Annex
A[15]
lists the projects we currently have firm plans to fund, which
have security as a major driver, from our CSR settlement. Please
note, the FCO is providing this information to the Committee in
confidence. We do not want the information contained in the document
to become public knowledge.
— The joint FCO/IPS Outline Business
Justification
A draft joint FCO/IPS Outline Business Justification,
examining the case for merging the home and overseas passport
operations, was produced in February and submitted to the Change
and Investment Boards. In keeping with FCO procedures an executive
summary based on the OBJ and reflecting the comments of the Change
and Investment Board members, was prepared for the FCO Management
Board on 29 February. They endorsed the proposal to hand over
responsibility for full passport services to the IPS post-2012.
(The FCO will retain responsibility for emergency documents).
The IPS Investment Forum reviewed the full OBJ on 21 February.
While supporting the concept of integration they requested further
analysis of the costs and benefits. The IPS Management Board reconsidered
the strategic case for integration at a meeting on 2 April and
concluded that a joint FCO/IPS Project should now proceed to facilitate
the merger, subject to a full impact and risk assessment and further
reassurance around the financial case. When this work is complete
we intend, subject to agreement with the Home Office, to share
the business case with the Foreign Affairs Committee.
— The results of UKvisas' audits
of its commercial partners' data security procedures and results
of the cross-Government review of data security
An outline of the results of UKvisas' audits
of its commercial partners' data security procedures is at Annex
B. The FCO is still awaiting the outcome of the cross-Government
review on data handling which is due to report in April. It will
then be taking forward the new processes and standards on protecting
personal data that are set out in that Review. It will keep the
Committee updated on its progress.
— Updates on future plans for telephone
information services contracts
A one year contract has now been signed with
Abtran and will run until 31 March 2009. It has been agreed that
we will go out to competitive tender this year for a new contract
to run from 1 April 2009.
— The outcomes and conclusions of
the pilots of tools for the evaluations framework of Public Diplomacy
The pilot of tools for the evaluation of Public
Diplomacy runs for two years, from April 2007 to March 2009. It
is being conducted jointly with the British Council. We are currently
analysing the data that has been collected from pilot countries
over the first year of the pilot, 2007-08, and we will be in a
position to provide information on interim outcomes and conclusions
based on this data in May 2008. Final outcomes and conclusions
using data covering the full two years of the pilot will only
be available after April 2009.
— The targets agreed with BBC World
Service for 2008 onwards
The FCO is in the process of agreeing annual
performance targets with the BBC World Service. These will be
finalised in May, after which we will send a full copy to the
FAC for information.
VALEDICTORY MESSAGES
The Committee would like details of the criteria
by which the "smaller group of contacts with a real interest
in the issues under discussion" are selected for receipt
of valedictory messages.
It is for Heads of Mission to judge the group
of contacts with a real interest in their valedictory messages,
as they do with their other communications. The address list will
therefore depend on the level of interest in the country or organisation
to which the Head of Mission is accredited, and on the relevant
issues raised in his or her dispatch.
The Committee also asked for sight of the FCO's
Top Risk Register. We note that the Chairman wrote on 27 March
to the Foreign Secretary on the same subject. The Foreign Secretary
replied on 25 April on this specific matter.
30 April 2008
15 Not printed. Back
| 
