3 The British Council
74. The British Council and the BBC World Service
are the two major non-departmental public bodies associated with
the FCO. The official purpose of the British Council is to "build
engagement and trust for the UK through the exchange of knowledge
and ideas between people worldwide".[96]
It is funded by a mixture of direct grants from the FCO and revenues
gained from the British Council's commercial activities, chiefly
teaching and examinations operations. In 2009-10, the British
Council received just over £200 million from the FCO for
its public diplomacy activity, which equates to around 30% of
its turnover (£705 million in 2009-10). The majority of its
income comes from sources other than direct FCO grants: for every
£1 of Government grant the British Council receives, £2.50
is earned from other sources.[97]
The British Council also receives grants from other government
departments. For example, it received £10.5 million in 2009-10
from the Department of Children, Schools and Families to fund
education projects.[98]
75. Our predecessor Committee looked at the British
Council in a Report published in January 2010. It concluded that
financial year 2009-10 would be a difficult period for the Council
which had undergone a "fundamental change to [its] business
model". The Council's planned restructuring included a voluntary
redundancy programme during 2009-10 which will "see a reduction
in UK posts by 500, equivalent to one-third of the UK workforce."
This was part of a package that was estimated to save the Council
£85 million by 2013-14.[99]
76. The Spending Review confirmed that there
would be cuts to the direct grant received by the British Council
from the FCO. Between 2010-11 and 2014-15, the value of the FCO's
grant would fall from £180.9 million to £149 million.
Allowing for inflation, this represents a real cut in the region
of 25%. Martin Davidson, Chief Executive of the British Council,
told us that this was a settlement that "will secure the
British Council's global network" and which "confirmed
the value of the British Council's cultural relations work as
a major contributor to the UK's international relations".[100]
77. The table below was prepared for us by the
House of Commons Scrutiny Unit. It details the grant funding that
the British Council will receive from the FCO over the length
of the Spending Review period.
| Resource budget
| Capital budget
|
| Grant funding
£m
| Grant restated in 2010-11 prices
£m
| Real-term change in grant since 2010-11 baseline
| Grant funding
£m
| Grant restated in 2010-11 prices
£m
| Real-term change in grant since 2010-11 baseline
|
2010-11 (baseline) | 181
| 181 | -
| 5.4 | 5.4
| - |
2011-12 | 173
| 170 | -6%
| 7.0 | 6.9
| 27% |
2012-13 | 165
| 158 | -13%
| 6.0 | 5.8
| 7% |
2013-14 | 157
| 147 | -19%
| 5.0 | 4.7
| -13% |
2014-15 | 149
| 136 | -25%
| 5.0 | 4.6
| -16% |
78. Vernon Ellis. Chair of the British Council, told us that
the Spending Review settlement meant that the Council would have
to act in three areas:
- Further efficiency savings including the further rationalisation
of functions away from the London headquarters to India;
- The cutting of some programmes, and
- Reducing geographic coverage, especially the
closure of sites in smaller countries.[101]
Martin Davidson said to us that greater commercialisation
and partnerships with commercial organisations would be a key
part of the Council's future.[102]
British Council efficiency savings
79. The 2007 Comprehensive Spending Review committed
the British Council to generate £20.8 million of savings
on its grant by March 2011. Savings announced to the British Council's
budget in the Spending Review will be in addition to this programme.
In January 2010 the British Council told our predecessor Committee
that it was on target to meet the £20.8 million target by
2011. To meet this target the Council had reduced its physical
overseas network,[103]
introduced certain services for paying customers only and cut
its UK staffing by one third (around 500 posts). The Council's
Annual Report also stated that the number of overseas staff would
be reduced by "several hundred". Martin Davidson told
us that the savings programme initiated as a result of the 2007
savings programme and scheduled to finish in 2011 had caused "real
pain within the organisation" and led to a radical change
in how the Council operated. This change had included the outsourcing
of finance, IT and human resources work away from the UK to Delhi.
In addition, and as a result of this change, staffing in the UK,
which is split between the London head office and regional offices
providing Council services, was planned to be reduced from 1,250
to 800.[104] Currently
there are 825 full-time staff employed in the UK. Mr Davidson
was confident that the "balance [of staff reductions] will
be gone by the end of the financial year".[105]
80. At the time of our evidence session, the
Council was unable to inform us exactly what effect the 2010 Spending
Review would have on staffing levels; however, it is clear that
there will be some further reduction. Martin Davidson called it
"inevitable" that there will be staff reductions in
the UK, but "given that the reduction in income for the organisation
is a fairly straight line in terms of trajectory, I wouldn't expect
a huge change in a very short period of time. I would expect the
change to take place over the next two years".[106]
81. There appeared to be some disagreement amongst
our witnesses from the British Council as to whether the renewed
programme of staff reductions would impact on service delivery.
Martin Davidson told us that "there is a lot of bureaucracy
and administrative overhead in the organisation which we will
need to strip out, but also there will be a reduction in services,
absolutely".[107]
He added that "part of that we will look to replace through
our income-generating activity, but it certainly won't be possible
to replace all of it".[108]
Vernon Ellis, however, told us that "at the moment we have
an organisation designed to support [a] rather complicated way
of doing things. It [the Spending Review] isn't going to be all
our savings [...] and I don't think that that will reduce service
at all." Instead he restated his commitment to preserving
the UK service element of the programmean "important
part of our service" which is provided via the regional officesbut
reducing unnecessary overheads in the form of UK head office functions.
Reducing costs and increasing
turnover
82. In addition to further reductions to staffing
in the UK and continued efforts on outsourcing back office functions,
Martin Davidson told us that 35% of the new cuts announced in
the 2010 Spending Review would be from reducing the Council's
overheads and changing how the Council operated overseas. Both
Mr Davidson and Mr Ellis told us that the Council would have to
look further at its geographic coverage and examine ways to cut
costs by reducing the Council's presence. Mr Ellis spoke of rationalising
operations in smaller countries by introducing a 'hub and spoke'
model.[109] Mr Davidson
suggested that "there will probably be a number of places
where we will have a virtual rather than a physical presence in
the future".[110]
83. According to the NAO, the British Council
intends to:
make savings by finding greater efficiencies and
enhancing the commercialisation of their operations. The grant
given to the British Council will reduce by 25% in real terms
over the next four years, which reflects the Council's projected
doubling of income by 2014-15.[111]
Around 70% of the British Council's revenue is currently
earned through commercial activities, mostly through the provision
of English language courses and exams. Income from commercial
activities increased by 9% in the last year.
84. The Permanent Under-Secretary at the FCO,
Simon Fraser, stated that one reason the British Council had faced
deeper cuts than the 'core FCO' was precisely because the Council
had the capacity, which the core FCO lacked, to supplement its
Grant-in-Aid through commercial activities.[112]
We queried with our British Council witnesses whether this increased
emphasis on commercialisation would adversely affect the reputation
and role of the Council around the world. Vernon Ellis accepted
there was a potential danger that the Council might focus on,
"for example, places in Europe, where it is nice and easy
and profitable", at the expense of diminishing its wider
global capability.[113]
Martin Davidson spoke of a "double bottom-line"financial
and reputationalwith regard to undertaking commercial work.[114]
He also drew our attention to the Council's increasing capacity
to work in partnership with commercial organisations: about £50
million had been raised through such partnership in financial
year 2009-10. He cited the example of co-operation between the
Council and the Microsoft learning network over school-linking
in sub-Saharan Africa. Both he and Vernon Ellis argued that maintaining
the 'brand' and cultural reputation of the British Council was
desirable for commercial as well as other reasons, as its existence
was one of the principal reasons why commercial partners wanted
to work with the Council.[115]
85. We conclude that the British
Council faces great strain on its budget over the next four years.
A 25% reduction over this period may well trigger some fundamental
rethinking of the role and work of the Council. We appreciate
that the Council, like other public-sector bodies, has had very
little time to prepare its response to proposed reductions in
expenditure. Nonetheless, we note that there was a lack of clarity
from our British Council witnesses on the important issue of whether
cuts would necessarily entail service reductions. It is difficult
to conceive that some service reductions will not be necessary.
We further conclude that the extent to which the British Council
can maintain anything like its current levels of service and geographic
coverage will depend on its ability to increase its income from
commercial activity and partnership. That in turn will entail
a difficult balancing act in which the Council must seek to maximise
its income from the sale of English language teaching and other
services, whilst not compromising over the pursuit of its primary
purpose, to "build engagement and trust for the UK through
the exchange of knowledge and ideas between people worldwide".
86. We recommend that in its
response to this Report, the British Council should supply us
with a report on the progress it has made towards developing a
detailed strategy for implementing the overall 25% cut, including
details of further staff reductions and of the measures it has
taken to ensure that the British Council's unique 'brand' will
not be damaged by this strategy.
96 British Council, Annual Report 2009-10, page
43 Back
97
British Council, Annual Report 2009-10 Back
98
National Audit Office, Memorandum to the Foreign Affairs Select
Committee, November 2010; http://www.nao.org.uk/publications/1011/foreign_affairs_committee.aspx Back
99
Ev 82 [British Council] Back
100
Ev 80 [Martin Davidson] Back
101
Q 5 Back
102
Q 8 Back
103
Information centres in Berlin, Thessaloniki, Vienna and Brussels
were closed. Outreach centres in Romania and Bulgaria were closed
and walk-in public access had been reduced in Israel, Estonia,
Lithuania, Hungary, Russia and Slovenia. Back
104
Qq 20-21 Back
105
Q 27 Back
106
Q 31, 33 Back
107
Q 28 Back
108
Q 28 Back
109
Q 5 Back
110
Q 21 Back
111
National Audit Office, Memorandum to the Foreign Affairs Select
Committee, November 2010; http://www.nao.org.uk/publications/1011/foreign_affairs_committee.aspx
Back
112
Ev 48 [Simon Fraser] Back
113
Q 8 Back
114
Q 9 Back
115
Qq 8-9 Back
|