Oral evidence: FCO Budget and Capacity, and Annual Report, HC 836
Oral evidence, 22 November 2016.
Witnesses
Sir Simon McDonald, Karen Pierce and Andrew Sanderson.
Chair
Welcome to this afternoon’s session of the Foreign Affairs Committee, taking evidence on the budget of the FCO, its capacity and the annual report. Sir Simon, welcome again. Perhaps you could introduce yourself and the team.
Sir Simon McDonald
Thank you, Mr Chairman. I am Simon McDonald, PUS at the Foreign Office. On my left is Karen Pierce, who is our chief operating officer, and on my right is Andrew Sanderson, who is our director of finance.
Chair
After the Prime Minister’s Mansion House speech last week, Richard Whitman of the Economic and Social Research Council criticised the Government for having “a gaping hole where Britain’s foreign policy should be”. What do you understand Her Majesty’s Government’s foreign policy to be?
Sir Simon McDonald
To defend and promote British interests around the world, which is what we have been doing since 1782.
Chair
Can it be summed up as “global Britain”?
Sir Simon McDonald
I think it can because that phrase encapsulates the idea that, no matter the wiring with institutions on our continent, the United Kingdom’s ambition and reach is around the world. It is our intention to play a role around the world.
Chair
I note that in your letter to us of 21 July reporting on that quarter, your priority in the coming months was to have the “staff and capability to promote a global Britain post the referendum”. I note that the Foreign Secretary appears to have first referenced global Britain in a speech four days before that. The term “global Britain” then appeared in the Prime Minister’s speech to the Conservative party conference.
Sir Simon McDonald
Joined-up government, Mr Chairman.
Chair
I was going to say, do we take it from that the Foreign and Commonwealth Office has been restored to its place as the lead on foreign policy in our Government?
Sir Simon McDonald
I have always felt that the Foreign and Commonwealth Office had that lead, despite the fact that there are players—and indeed, in recent months, more players—in the international space. As the Committee knows, since 13 July there are two new Departments of State—the Department for Exiting the European Union and the Department for International Trade. We are working with those Departments to promote the national interest.
Chair
You have been shorn of the Prosperity Agenda to the Department for International Trade and of, obviously, the most important negotiation the United Kingdom has undertaken for a very long time—our Brexit negotiations—to the Department for Exiting the European Union. You have also lost people, as you reported to us in your latest letter, to both Departments in order to support them in that, so can it really be said that the Department is in the lead on foreign policy?
Sir Simon McDonald
I would dispute your characterisation, Mr Chairman. In the exit negotiation, the Foreign Office is playing an important role but clearly, the lead role is Mr Davis and the Department for Exiting the European Union—the clue is in the title of his Department of State—but the Foreign Office is helping in at least four distinct ways. First, there is the network.
Chair
We will come to Brexit-specific questions in a minute. My question is more generally about the capacity of the Office.
Sir Simon McDonald
My point is we are still there.
Chair
Yes. Do you have the resources you need to implement the Global Britain strategy with sufficient vigour? While you’re answering, is it a strategy or a vision?
Sir Simon McDonald
The resources are always a challenge, but we have what we are given by the Government and we make the best use of the resource. We were grateful that, in the previous Chancellor’s autumn statement last year, he chose to treat the Foreign Office as a protected Department like the other two main Departments in the overseas space: the Department for International Development and the Ministry of Defence. But all Departments face a challenge with resources, so my job, and my board’s job, is to make the best use of them—to deploy them where they have the most effect—and that is what we try to do.
Chair
Diplomacy 20:20 is presumably the means to support Global Britain. How much has Diplomacy 20:20 had to change in the light of Global Britain, if you like, becoming the vision post-23 June?
Sir Simon McDonald
Diplomacy 20:20 predated 23 June. I became PUS on 1 September 2015. It is not unusual for a new PUS to look at his organisation and think how to improve it, so I had a review—the “Future FCO” review—in the first three months of the year. The review’s main conclusions fed into Diplomacy 20:20—Diplomacy 20:20 is the implementation plan—and the focus is on three areas: expertise, agility and platform. In my view, all three of those areas are even more important after 23 June, so the validity of the programme was reinforced by the referendum result, which is why we have stuck with that programme.
Chair
When you wrote to us on 21 July you told us, in referring to Diplomacy 20:20, that you would “present more detail about the programme to staff in the FCO in October and to you in my next update.” In your next update, which we received last week, you said: “We will communicate the detail of Diplomacy 20:20 to staff in early December. We will also engage our Whitehall partners”—which I presume includes us; I hope it does—“drawing on their input where they can add value and where they have particular interest.” Why the delay?
Sir Simon McDonald
There has been some slippage, as you correctly identify, Mr Chairman. The Brexit vote was a major development, so I would pray that in aid.
Chair
It had happened on 21 July.
Sir Simon McDonald
The full consequences will take even longer than five months to work out. We are having a big board meeting on 29 November, so a lot of the programme will be rolled out to the FCO—to the service—in December. Of course, in parallel, I will set it out to yourself and your Committee.
Chair
The concern, which we will explore this in greater detail this afternoon, is the resources. Could I now explore the resources available for Britain to deepen its contributions to the key multilateral institutions, such as the UN, G20 and NATO, in the wake of Brexit?
Sir Simon McDonald
We have identified, in this first phase—this first reaction—that we need to reinforce first of all in Europe itself, in the bilateral European Union countries and posts, and key multilateral organisations, especially the United Nations in Geneva and NATO. One thing that I will be setting out to the service next week is that we are doing some upgrading of jobs in Europe, and some reinforcement of our bilateral posts. We had a zero-based review a dozen years ago, which reduced in seniority 20 of the 27 ambassadorial posts we have around Europe. Seven of those posts went to D7, so beneath the senior management structure; all seven of those have been upgraded to SMS1. That change will take effect immediately and we are reinforcing the posts. Quite a few of those posts had become very small indeed. We have already posted 16 extra people, mostly on migration issues. We have identified another 34 slots, which we will post in the next period, focused on political and lobbying, and also on some corporate, in order to release the time of the ambassador and the DHM to do more political work. So, in Europe we will do more. For the two key multilateral organisations in Geneva, we have bid with DIT for more resource in the autumn statement, so we shall find out tomorrow, but we hope to put more slots into our representation in Geneva.
Chair
How much have you bid for overall?
Karen Pierce
It was a £10 million joint bid with DIT.
Chair
For that programme? Or is that the only extra bid you sought?
Karen Pierce
It was for an initial wave of trade policy slots overseas. Until we have settled our continuing relationship on the trade side with the European Union, we do not know exactly what we will be doing overseas with things like FTAs and trade negotiations. This is an initial outlay to help us shape, and analyse, places overseas with which we might want to develop a trading relationship.
Chair
Is that it?
Karen Pierce
No, that was the first wave.
Chair
Is that all you have asked for?
Karen Pierce
At this stage, yes it is.
Chair
The opinion of this Committee is that we were going to need to double or treble the resources available to the Foreign Office. Obviously that is going to be swept up—in April, we could not have foreseen the creation of the Department for International Trade and DExEU. But is that is your bid to the Chancellor: £10 million?
Sir Simon McDonald
We work with the reality of resource constraint that affects all Government Departments. As you know, the Chancellor used to be the Foreign Secretary, so he is well aware of our need, but he has tutored us in the constraints.
Chair
But the truth is that the network, which we pride ourselves on—you pride yourselves on—and the breadth of it, is actually now far too thin, isn’t it? Is there not an argument now for narrowing that?
Sir Simon McDonald
We recognise that. In this first reaction, we are showing some thickening in the places where we most need it in the next two or three years. The negotiation that is about to start is not only with Brussels, but with our 27 partner member states in the European Union, so our representation needs to be bigger there and we are doing something about that straight away.
Chair
Sorry, say that again?
Sir Simon McDonald
In the European Union—in the 27 other member states—
Chair
Bilaterally, with the member states?
Sir Simon McDonald
—in the bilateral posts. In Geneva, there is a bid for extra UK-based and LE resource. In UKDel NATO, the Director General for Defence and Intelligence has already, through good housekeeping, moved an extra three slots to UKDel NATO in Brussels.
Chair
Where are these people coming from?
Sir Simon McDonald
Elsewhere in her cone. Each director general has a certain quantum of resource. A certain amount can be done by that DG. Bigger movements are done by the board.
Chair
I will not disguise my anxiety about the scale of your bid to deal with the challenge you face. I am referring to presenting Global Britain—a new role for Britain in the world, which is obviously encapsulated by Global Britain.
Sir Simon McDonald
I am grateful for the Chairman and the Committee’s support, but we work in a certain political environment and reality.
Chair
Well, we’ll explore this. It is a service cut to the bone and now at crisis point. We will get into some of the issues about the quality of the people and the implications for them, and the fact that we do not have enough people in the missions overseas; we will get on to all of these in the course of the questions. I just want to finish, before asking my colleagues to join in, by asking this: Global Britain is the name of a campaigning organisation that for 20 years has campaigned for the United Kingdom to leave the European Union. We are now leaving the European Union. Is this identity overlap deliberate or an accident?
Sir Simon McDonald
I thank the Chairman for drawing my attention to this fact. I discovered it for myself last week. The fact it took so long to discover means, I suggest, it is not the highest-profile organisation. I have set it as a task for my director of communication that our Global Britain will take precedence on Google.
Mr Holloway
Sir Simon, one thing that struck me while talking to my friends in the Foreign Office was how almost to a man they are pro-remain. Is there a bit of a leadership issue for you in getting people behind what the British people have decided?
Sir Simon McDonald
Possibly yes, but my experience of my service is that we work for the Government of the United Kingdom energetically. There was a process of adjustment for sure, but I think my organisation is making that adjustment and, under Boris Johnson’s leadership, is now behind the programme, as you have a right to expect.
Daniel Kawczynski
Coming from an exports background, I am very passionate about our export strategy. With regard to the trade envoys that the Prime Minister has appointed and is in the process of appointing, would you mind giving us your evaluation of what support and interest the Foreign Office has for that programme and how it will dovetail into some of your work across the world with your embassies?
Sir Simon McDonald
These envoys have played a valuable role. I am not familiar with the work of all of them, but two whose work I have seen personally have been very impressive, and they have been impressive because they have worked so closely with the missions on the spot. Mark Garnier, in south-east Asia, and Patricia Scotland, in South Africa, have done a lot of work to promote the United Kingdom—the United Kingdom economy and prosperity—in those regions. Clearly, the new Prime Minister appreciates what earlier envoys have done and so she is renewing that programme.
Ann Clwyd
The Foreign Secretary recently told this Committee that the UK and the FCO were going to contribute to global stability and prosperity and promote the spread of values such as democracy and free speech. Can you tell me exactly where human rights and our values fit into our foreign policy?
Sir Simon McDonald
I think they run as a thread through all our foreign policy, Ms Clwyd. One thing I hope we are achieving in the Foreign Office is mainstreaming human rights as part of the work of everybody working in the organisation. Our values are part of what distinguishes us. The rule of law and the equalities and freedoms that define the United Kingdom are part of our global brand and part of why people are interested in us. As you know, we have some programmes that stress that. In the last year we launched the Magna Carta fund with £10 million a year, and that is one of the main vehicles for promoting individual human rights projects.
Karen Pierce
The Foreign Secretary has maintained an advisory group on human rights. He has refreshed some of the members, but it is full of distinguished practitioners.
Ann Clwyd
It has not met very often, has it?
Karen Pierce
It has met as often as the Foreign Secretary’s schedule allows. Obviously, he has had to do a lot of travelling since he took office. There was a meeting earlier this month.
Ann Clwyd
Last time Sir Simon gave evidence to us, we talked about the priorities of the new foreign policy. I recall that he said trade was top of the list of priorities and that human rights were very near the bottom. Has there been any development?
Sir Simon McDonald
I remember the first part of that statement, Ms Clwyd, but not the second. I was talking about the raw resource that was principally dedicated to each of those areas. When we look through our management information, clearly more resource is devoted exclusively or principally to prosperity than to human rights, but it is fundamentally important to us in the Foreign Office that human rights are part of everybody’s work. Even though it is not the top line, it is there in the mix. I regard all our network and everybody who is working for us—both UK-based and locally employed—as having this as part of their job description.
Ann Clwyd
To press you again on the number of times that this group has met, could it be only once a year if the Foreign Secretary is too busy to get involved in it?
Sir Simon McDonald
As you know, the Foreign Secretary was appointed on 13 July, and he met this refreshed group for the first time on 16 November.
Ann Clwyd
Are there any future dates in the calendar?
Sir Simon McDonald
I do not know, but we will let you know through the Committee Chair.
Mr Hendrick
Sir Simon, in response to the Chairman’s first question about what you understand British foreign policy to be, it sounded very much to me like the global Britain from towards the end of the 18th century. Do you feel that the Foreign Office has not been carrying out a Global Britain strategy and has only needed to carry one out since the Brexit referendum?
Sir Simon McDonald
There are many constant themes in British foreign policy—I know there are several historians around the table. After the vote on 23 June, it is time to have another look and to re-emphasise. Over the last four decades, we had increasingly been seen on the wider world stage as part of the European Union. We did ever more work with the European Union, but it is not true that the rest of the world principally saw us as part of the European Union. Our further-afield colleagues in organisations such as the United Nations said that we were still principally seen as the United Kingdom, but in some places the idea took root, so we need to do something about that. In future we will not be seen as a player on the wider international stage through Brussels. We will be acting on our own behalf, so Global Britain is a re-emphasis of what was there before.
Mr Hendrick
Given that international trade, and trade generally, has been taken away from the Foreign Office, and obviously that is a loss in terms of personnel as well as resources, what do you think the Foreign Office will be doing after EU exit that it wasn’t doing before?
Sir Simon McDonald
The Foreign Office is the principal player in 192 other members of the United Nations; we supervise the bilateral relationships between Governments; and we are, I think, the Ministry that knows best how to get things done overseas, especially officially. In embassies around the world, other parts of Governments nestle underneath the effort led by the ambassador or the high commissioner, as part of a “One HMG” team. The Foreign Office has a key convening and co-ordinating role for all parts of Government.
Mr Hendrick
But it had before as well.
Sir Simon McDonald
You say that trade and prosperity have been taken away. Trade is now in the Department for International Trade but prosperity is still substantially with the Foreign Office. As you know, a new Prosperity Fund has been launched this financial year. In the first year it has £60 million, £50 million of which is in projects proposed by and being run by the Foreign Office.
Mr Hendrick
So that is a new, additional responsibility.
Sir Simon McDonald
It is something that has happened in financial year 2016-17.
Andrew Rosindell
Of course, Global Britain is an organisation already set up to focus Britain on the wider world—on economic prosperity beyond the bounds of Europe. It is a superb strategy, I have to say, but surely Global Britain should be based on our history, looking to our future, and that is the Commonwealth. What is the Foreign and Commonwealth Office doing to expand its Commonwealth operation? How many officials, for instance, work on the desk that deals with the Commonwealth compared with the European Union?
Sir Simon McDonald
The Commonwealth are key partners. As you know, there are now 52 member states. We have very smooth relations with most of them and do not require a huge bureaucracy to supervise those relations. Since 23 June, there has been a new emphasis on some of those relationships. We are even looking to those countries to help us in parts of the negotiation lying ahead. I expect officials from some of our close Commonwealth partners to work with us quite directly on what we are doing.
Andrew Rosindell
How many officials do you have working on the Commonwealth desk at the moment?
Sir Simon McDonald
The Commonwealth desk is part of our multilateral department. We have a directorate that covers a series of international organisations; the Commonwealth is one of those. I cannot give you an exact figure. I fear it would disappoint you, Mr Rosindell, by being relatively small, but it is effective. One key thing we are doing with the Commonwealth in the next 18 months is organising CHOGM—the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting—which will be in the UK in spring 2018. It will be a big moment for the United Kingdom, a big moment for the UK in the Commonwealth, and it is a deliberate signal of our interest.
Andrew Rosindell
Did you know there were three Commonwealth Heads of Government in London last week who were not even shown the courtesy of a meeting with the Foreign Secretary or the Prime Minister? Is this the way we treat our Commonwealth friends at a time of need?
Sir Simon McDonald
I believe they met Her Majesty.
Andrew Rosindell
We are talking about members of the Government who are dealing with policy issues; the Queen, of course, does not do that.
Sir Simon McDonald
I did not know they had not seen either the Prime Minister or the Foreign Secretary.
Andrew Rosindell
Did you know they had no reception when they arrived in this country, no car to take them around and no security, even? Is that what we should be doing with our Commonwealth Prime Ministers when they are visiting the United Kingdom, Sir Simon?
Sir Simon McDonald
As you know, Mr Rosindell, security is something that is decided by need—
Andrew Rosindell
But courtesy is something that we should afford.
Sir Simon McDonald
I shall take your point on courtesy and look at that.
Chair
To follow up Mr Rosindell’s point about the relationship with Commonwealth countries and the point you made that there might be some increase in its relative importance and the rest, it is quite difficult to see how that gets reinforced by people when we are having to invest extra people in the bilateral European relationships and when you are not getting any extra money.
Sir Simon McDonald
A lot of the relationship is run by relatively few senior people. There do not need to be huge numbers of people to make a relationship work. Since 23 June, I would say that the pace of contact between the Foreign Secretary and myself, and senior colleagues with Commonwealth opposite numbers, has increased. The work rate has increased. You will know that AUKMIN took place at Chelsea Hospital in September. The next meeting is scheduled for May next year in Australia. The Foreign Secretary and I plan then to go on to New Zealand. The work rate is increasing. What we are doing is more important than how many people are doing it.
Chair
Before I invite Mr Gethins to get stuck in on Brexit, there is this rather hard-hitting report by Tom Fletcher on the state of the Office. His lead on the five core propositions says that: “Our staff and those we work with require a clearer sense of what the FCO does and why.” Will you be able to answer that question satisfactorily?
Sir Simon McDonald
It is my whole job to answer that question and to live the answer. We represent the United Kingdom overseas. We get things done for the United Kingdom overseas. We now have the most important negotiation of my career ahead of us, and my organisation will play a central part in that.
Chair
On that note, I call Stephen Gethins.
Stephen Gethins
In terms of preparing for the most important negotiations of your career—the negotiations on leaving the European Union, or on the plans to leave the European Union—has your Department been asked to consider its priorities and to present plans to the centre of Government? I believe that is the case. If so, how have you gone about that process? What progress have you made so far?
Sir Simon McDonald
Can you repeat the questions?
Stephen Gethins
Yes, of course. To prepare for leaving the European Union, we understand that each Department has been asked to consider its priorities and to present plans to the centre of Government. Is that something you are doing at the moment? Are you considering your plans and priorities?
Sir Simon McDonald
In the context—
Stephen Gethins
In the context of leaving the European Union and what that means in three years’ time.
Sir Simon McDonald
I do not recognise a particular request, but it is what we are doing in any case. When we leave the European Union, the wiring of the United Kingdom in the international system will be different, so we are already thinking about that. As I have already said, the first response is quite close to home and is quite focused on key multilateral organisations. Looking further ahead, as the chief operating officer said, those countries with whom we want most quickly to develop a thicker trading relationship will also be in focus, and I would expect those relationships also to get more resource.
Stephen Gethins
Okay. Will you be publishing a plan for how that looks or for how the FCO will look in three years’ time?
Sir Simon McDonald
Just by itself?
Stephen Gethins
If you are going to undertake the most important negotiations of your career on a fundamental change in the United Kingdom’s relationship with other parts of Europe, will you be publishing anything on your plans or on how the FCO might look? Will there be anything that can be scrutinised by the House?
Sir Simon McDonald
All Departments, as you know, now have a single departmental plan. That will be the first vehicle for that, but I am happy to take away the idea that there should be a more public document in which we set out a wider ambition. You will understand that I need to discuss that with the Foreign Secretary.
Stephen Gethins
I understand that entirely, but given the importance that you have attached to these negotiations and that we all attach to these negotiations, I think there should be a plan in place for how you undertake those negotiations and for your future vision. As you did not plan for leaving the European Union prior to 23 June, I assume that you are quickly having to get up to speed on how things will look in the aftermath of that result. I therefore hope that at some point soon you will publish something that we can scrutinise.
Sir Simon McDonald
We will certainly publish something.
Stephen Gethins
Have you ever been asked to input into a White Paper, or to prepare for a White Paper, in the aftermath of the High Court decision?
Sir Simon McDonald
The High Court decision on whether Parliament needs to be consulted before article 50 is triggered?
Stephen Gethins
Yes.
Sir Simon McDonald
Our lawyers in the Foreign Office are deeply involved in that process. I am not.
Stephen Gethins
Right, but no policy White Paper is being prepared at the moment for Parliament to scrutinise?
Sir Simon McDonald
At the moment, the Government Law Officers are in charge of this policy, with input from the specialists around Whitehall, including the legal adviser and his team in the Foreign Office.
Stephen Gethins
So there is no White Paper?
Sir Simon McDonald
To my knowledge, no.
Stephen Gethins
Thank you. I will pass over to my colleague, but I will have a couple more questions later.
Nadhim Zahawi
Briefly, David Davis told our Committee in September that his Department is responsible for UKRep in Brussels. You quite rightly confirmed that.
Chair
Aren’t you shooting someone else’s fox there? If it is on Brussels, I think Mr Gapes has that. If I am wrong, I apologise, but let me go to Mr Gapes.
Mike Gapes
In our September session, when the Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union came before us, he told me that he had full responsibility for UKRep. He said that, apart from what he called “pay and rations”, there was no relationship with the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. More recently, when the Foreign Secretary came before us in October, I asked him whether UKRep reported to him. He said, “Yes, of course it does” and told us that he had “regular contact”. You wrote to us on 17 November that your view was that UKRep reports jointly to the FCO and the Department for Exiting the European Union. Can you confirm today that the turf war of personalities is over?
Sir Simon McDonald
My clear understanding is that this was debated when the Department for Exiting the European Union was set up in July. The decision was to copy the practice of a delegation elsewhere in Brussels, UKDel NATO, which reports to two Secretaries of State, the Foreign Secretary and the Defence Secretary. UKRep is going to have a similar arrangement but with the Foreign Secretary and the Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, so there are two reporting lines from Brussels to London.
Mike Gapes
You wrote to us a few days ago that “we are developing a memorandum of understanding setting out how that will work in practice”. Can you tell us when that memorandum of understanding will be made available to this Committee and to the public?
Sir Simon McDonald
It is already working in practice. The chief operating officer has negotiated with the new Department. Perhaps you could add some more detail, Ms Pierce.
Karen Pierce
On the whole, the MOU is on the pay and rations side—what happens if a member of UKRep is asked to do detached duty back in London or in Berlin, for the sake of argument. It is about terms and conditions, posting lengths and how the budget is used—for example, if they needed to strengthen a particular area, like lobbying.
Mike Gapes
So the memorandum of understanding already exists?
Karen Pierce
We are drawing it up now, but we have had an exchange of letters at official level to scope this out. It is all in line with the written ministerial statement that was given to the House.
Mike Gapes
When?
Karen Pierce
When the Prime Minister first announced the creation of the Department for Exiting the EU.
Mike Gapes
So what we have is a memorandum of understanding that is not yet complete, but is in line with the statement made by the Prime Minister prior to the two Ministers coming before our Committee and saying contradictory things. Is that true?
Karen Pierce
As the Permanent Under-Secretary set out, the Minister has appeared and he has just confirmed that UK Representation reports to two Secretaries of State. I expect that when the MOU is finally ready, we will repeat that, but the MOU itself is much less interesting: it is about how we operate the running of UK Representation.
Mike Gapes
Will that MOU be made available to Parliament?
Karen Pierce
We can certainly look at that, but we would not normally publish that sort of internal exchange of letters, emails, between ourselves and another Government Department, but I do not think that there would be any mystery in it, so we would be happy to show you.
Mike Gapes
So this Committee could see it?
Karen Pierce
If DExEU were happy—I am happy to ask them. But it is a joint minute.
Mike Gapes
I see. It is very unclear. Would they be making it available to the Committee to be chaired by Hilary Benn in that case, rather than to this Committee?
Karen Pierce
I do not think that at the moment they contemplate it needing to be available, because, I repeat, it is a very workmanlike document—but there is no secret in it, so if my colleagues are happy, I would be happy to show it to the Committee.
Mike Gapes
Okay. We may come back to this. What mechanisms are there from the policy process? In your answer, Ms Pierce, you referred to the procedure with pay and the various procedural issues, but what mechanisms are in place to ensure that there is a coherent policy for these two Departments?
Sir Simon McDonald
One of the most important, Mr Gapes, is that many of the personnel working for the new Department are drawn from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. Under our initial agreement, 35 policy officers, five lawyers, two researchers and two private secretaries went from the Foreign Office to the new Department, which is as you know is quite a small Department. In January, a DG from the Foreign Office will join DExEU and will be one of the three most senior officials in DExEU, so we are pulled together by personnel.
Karen Pierce
The two Departments also help each other with briefing. When the Foreign Secretary goes to the Foreign Affairs Council in Brussels, if the agenda items are those on which the EU Exit Department leads, it will provide the bulk of the briefing. Similarly, if Mr Davis visits Berlin and has wider talks, the Foreign Office would provide his briefing. The two Departments are working very well together.
Mike Gapes
While we remain within the European Union, what about the important work—the increasingly important work, given the American presidential election—of the common foreign and security policy of the European Union? Does that come under the FCO or the Brexit Department?
Sir Simon McDonald
It comes under the FCO.
Mike Gapes
Does that mean that Angus Lapsley, the ambassador on the Political and Security Committee, reports to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, not to the Department for leaving the EU?
Sir Simon McDonald
Yes. He reports to the Foreign Office.
Stephen Gethins
On that, we understand that you lost a number of members of staff to the Department for Exiting the European Union—
Sir Simon McDonald
We loaned them.
Stephen Gethins
A better term. Are you filling those vacancies?
Sir Simon McDonald
No, because that work was transferred from the Foreign Office to DExEU, and part of the deal was that the transfer was of that work, so there is no need to backfill.
Stephen Gethins
Right. So there is no backfilling of those vacancies. In that case, has the loss of personnel been matched by a reduction in your responsibilities?
Sir Simon McDonald
Correct.
Stephen Gethins
What about longer term? Do you anticipate having to staff up at UKRep, for instance? Or are you already doing so?
Sir Simon McDonald
UKRep is already a large mission for the FCO, for DExEU. A lot of the work that it is doing is driven by the contacts already made—so the people we have in UKRep Brussels are particularly valuable as individuals right now, because in our new situation the existing networks are going to be very important. I lay great emphasis on the shape and the personalities that we now have there.
Stephen Gethins
Do you think that UKRep will have to get bigger?
Sir Simon McDonald
That is something that I will discuss with my opposite number in DExEU. Right now, it is not decided.
Stephen Gethins
If it is to get bigger, or you anticipate that, will that be something you will report back to this Committee on?
Sir Simon McDonald
I expect us to be involved and yes, we will report back to the Committee.
Stephen Gethins
That would be very helpful. On the important issue of skills that you raised, will you talk us through what you are doing about recruitment, because obviously you need people with skills sets that you did not anticipate before 23 June? What is your recruitment process? Also, is there a concern about losing people with key skills to others who will need those skills as well?
Sir Simon McDonald
Recruitment and retention are strong in the diplomatic service. I met our batch of fast-stream recruits two weeks ago; they are as impressive and enthusiastic as ever. One of our emphases is on training, rather than recruiting for gaps. One response to the vote on 23 June is to set up for the first time a trade policy and negotiation faculty in the Diplomatic Academy. We are in the process of doing that, and we are doing it with DIT. We think that the best response is to train up people whom we already have, rather than recruiting expensively from outside.
Stephen Gethins
Okay. I have a final question, building on the Chair’s earlier question on the bid to the Chancellor next week.
Sir Simon McDonald
Tomorrow.
Stephen Gethins
Tomorrow, sorry. Given that you are talking about a significant increase in the bilateral relationships with the 27 other member states, and given there is a possibility that you may need to staff up in Brussels too, when do you anticipate trying to go back for more cash?
Sir Simon McDonald
Life is a constant negotiation, Mr Gethins. What we will do in the first place is the best with what we have, and we will build a case over the next year and years for more, but what we have to demonstrate to you and to the Treasury is that we make best use of what we have, because our experience of the Treasury is that the first question they ask is, “What is the re-prioritisation?”
Stephen Gethins
Sure, but you certainly appreciate that the great irony of leaving the European Union is that you will need more bureaucrats, not fewer, in the aftermath.
Sir Simon McDonald
I prefer not to call diplomats “bureaucrats”. The job of representing the United Kingdom on the wider international stage will be even more important when we are not in the European Union.
Chair
Sir Simon, before I ask Nadhim Zahawi to come in, can I ask whether the budget has gone with those people—the people who have gone to DExEU and the Department for International Trade? Does it come off your bottom line?
Andrew Sanderson
The formal transfer will be made in the supplementary estimates in January, but the money will follow the people.
Karen Pierce
It might be worth adding, though, that when the process of exiting is over and the negotiations are all done, our people who are on loan will come back, as Simon said. The expectation is that at that point the funding will transfer back with them.
Chair
We will come back to money. You can tell how impressed I am with the way this is going.
Nadhim Zahawi
Most of my questions have been covered, so I do not want to take up too much time. On the last point that you mentioned, Karen, ultimately this is a temporary thing, because it will be two and a bit years, presumably. Have you thought through how those people are going to come back? Are they all going to come back? Are some people being taken on on a temporary contract basis, where they do a job, get Brexit out, move on and do something else? Can you give us a bit more colour on how that will work?
Sir Simon McDonald
It is not just slots; it is individuals. These people joined the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, and it has been important, in talking to them as individuals, to say that there is a future planned. We have assured them that this is a temporary project. As I have already said, the clue is in the title of the Department of State. At the end of that project, we will bring them back. Because the world will be different, the work they come back to will not necessarily be the same, and they know that already. There will be plenty of other work to do when we are out of the European Union.
Nadhim Zahawi
On the US presidential elections, do you think there really is the potential for a quicker trade deal between the UK and the US now?
Sir Simon McDonald
I think that it is significant that the President-elect is interested in a trade deal with the United Kingdom. I suspect that it will be easier for the United States to negotiate an agreement—a quick agreement—with a country and an economy like the United Kingdom than with other potential partners. Yes, I think that both sides are interested, so yes, this is something that I would hope would happen sooner rather than later.
Nadhim Zahawi
So we are no longer at the back of the queue, as President Obama said to us.
Sir Simon McDonald
There will be a new President in the White House from 20 January.
Nadhim Zahawi
And you don’t think he will put us at the back of the queue. That is what you are saying; it is what I am hearing.
Sir Simon McDonald
I do not think we are at the back of the queue.
Nadhim Zahawi
Excellent. President-elect Trump advocated the proliferation of nuclear weapons during his campaign. If that came to pass, how would the FCO respond to countries such as Japan, Saudi Arabia and South Korea potentially having nuclear arms at their disposal?
Sir Simon McDonald
American campaigns are fascinating moments in political history. One of my previous jobs was for the secretary in the embassy in Washington. It was my job to follow the presidential campaign of 1996. I have to admit, Mr Zahawi, it was rather more boring than the campaign this year, but one thing I have learned is that what is said in the campaign is different from what happens when the winner is in the White House. I think it is very important for us to judge the new President by his actions in office. I think we have an opportunity to talk to him and his team before any of the subjects that he was asked about in theory become actual.
Chair
What about his actions in transition?
Sir Simon McDonald
The transition is under way, Mr Chairman.
Nadhim Zahawi
Let me push you a little harder on that, Sir Simon. President-elect Trump said yesterday that in his first 100 days he will deliver on coming out of the Asian trade agreement. If he were to decide that his foreign policy was to allow countries such as Saudi Arabia, South Korea and Japan to have nuclear weapons, what would be your position?
Sir Simon McDonald
There are already two conditionals in your sentence, so I’m afraid I’m going to hide behind them—
Nadhim Zahawi
Indeed there are; my job is to push you, on these things, to tell us what you will be recommending to the Foreign Secretary.
Sir Simon McDonald
I will recommend that we have a detailed conversation with the new Administration before any of these key subjects is decided.
Chair
What is your reaction to the extraordinary tweet yesterday?
Sir Simon McDonald
My reaction is that there is no vacancy in Massachusetts Avenue.
Chair
But it is fairly extraordinary, isn’t it, that in transition, he has not got professional advisers around him to realise how gratuitously insulting it is to the United Kingdom to start selecting our ambassador to the United States?
Sir Simon McDonald
Your words, Mr Chairman. I think that the United Kingdom will continue to select its own ambassadors, not only to the United States but to all countries.
Chair
I have assumed it was just a bit of harmless mischief. Do you think one should be any more substantive than that?
Sir Simon McDonald
All I will say is that we have an excellent ambassador in Washington, who today briefed the National Security Council on the US presidential election. There is no vacancy; I am not anticipating a vacancy.
Nadhim Zahawi
President-elect Trump has been critical of NATO. Can you clarify to our Committee the FCO's forward view on NATO and wider world security if the US substantially lessens its contributions, for example to NATO’s budget, or adopts a set of policies whereby it might fail to fulfil its NATO obligations and come to the aid of an endangered member state?
Sir Simon McDonald
NATO is the cornerstone of our defence. I believe it is also the cornerstone of the defence of the United States. I think it is one of the top priority issues to discuss with the President-elect and his new team. But I note that, as a candidate, Mr Trump said various things that European allies need to pay attention to. One is about the disparity in effort between the United States and Europe on our common defence. Right now, 40-odd per cent of the European defence effort is American—for the continent of Europe. I think this is something that Europe collectively needs to consider: how much longer can the single biggest player be the United States?
Nadhim Zahawi
Is this yet another major strategic shock that will force you at the FCO to reorientate your policy approach?
Sir Simon McDonald
Possible, potential. It has not happened, Mr Zahawi.
Nadhim Zahawi
So it could be?
Sir Simon McDonald
If it were to happen, yes, it would be a strategic shock. However, I think that already Mr Trump, as President-elect, is saying different things about NATO and security.
Ian Murray
A quick follow-up to that questioning, Sir Simon. On a scale of one to 10, where would you put your level of concern with regards to the proposed new US foreign policy under President-elect Trump, as opposed to the current US foreign policy under President Obama?
Sir Simon McDonald
Mr Murray, I do not think that you can say there is a new American foreign policy, because there is not yet even a new Secretary of State designate. I think that we can wait some time before assigning any kind of mark, because there is nothing to mark.
Ian Murray
If this Committee asked you to produce a Foreign Office risk register between now and, say, 8 January, how high up would the US presidential election come on that risk register?
Sir Simon McDonald
As you know, we do have a risk register, but part of the usefulness of that register is its confidential nature. I assure the Committee that we are looking at all factors.
Chair
There is a risk register that is published in association with the national security strategy and is the basis of the allocation of resources, or is meant to be—it is laughable when you consider the amount being spent on the deterrent.
Mike Gapes
We used to get it quarterly, in previous Parliaments; we used to get access to it.
Sir Simon McDonald
But the most interesting thing in this area, as you will understand, is necessarily confidential.
Andrew Rosindell
Sir Simon, on issues relating to British-American relations, will you use the opportunity of a new Administration—a new President who is clearly more likely to want to work with Britain and is more sympathetic to Britain—to change the American approach towards recognition of the Falkland Islands and Gibraltar as British, as the Canadians have done? Will our excellent ambassador in Washington also use the change of Administration to persuade them to allow Chagossian people to go back to British Indian Ocean Territory, so that we can uphold our human rights obligations?
Sir Simon McDonald
The ambassador will discuss the full range of foreign policy issues with the new Administration, for sure. That will include the matters you have outlined. However, as you know, Mr Rosindell, on the British Indian Ocean Territory, we have had a very careful look at the viability of returning islanders, and have decided that it is not viable. We are looking at other ways of maintaining their link with their ancestral homeland, which will be by visiting, rather than by returning to live.
Andrew Rosindell
But a change in Administration is surely an opportunity to bring the Americans in on this—
Sir Simon McDonald
But the basic facts of the difficulty of life on these tiny islands has not changed because of the election on 8 November.
Andrew Rosindell
We can beg to differ on that.
Daniel Kawczynski
My question has already been asked by the Chairman and some other members of the Committee, but there are two tangential issues that I wish to raise with you as the FCO recalibrates some of its responsibilities and priorities. I am interested to know what planning there is for a post-Brexit world where we still have 2 million of our citizens living in the European Union, and how you will ensure that their problems, so to speak, which they will inevitably continue to have, will be looked after. They will, I presume, lose some rights and securities, particularly those of our citizens living in Spain. Is there any work already starting to happen on what additional resources will be put into our embassies and areas to help our citizens out there?
Sir Simon McDonald
As you know, Mr Kawczynski, the status of UK citizens in the rest of the EU and EU citizens in the United Kingdom is one of the key planks of the negotiation, so that is still to be decided. It will happen in the context of the negotiation. For all the reasons you set out, it will be a very important part of the negotiation. The Government has made it clear that protecting the rights of our people elsewhere in the European Union is just as important to us as the ambition of other Governments to protect the rights of their citizens in the United Kingdom.
Daniel Kawczynski
Obviously, to go back to my earlier point, there will be even more enquiries at our embassies in a post-Brexit world in terms of the support and assistance that people will need. I remember the huge problems the Poles had when 900,000 came to live in this country. The consular services and the embassy were completely overstretched and were not able to deal with the huge diaspora that had built up in this country. I do not want us in a post-Brexit world suddenly not to have the capability and resources to help our numerous citizens.
Sir Simon McDonald
I take your point, Mr Kawczynski. As we look at our planning, we will bear it in mind.
Daniel Kawczynski
Secondly, I am very pleased to hear that the Prime Minister has now announced that there will be an annual Anglo-Polish summit. Obviously, a lot of resources will be required for implementing those summits. I don’t know how many other Anglo summits there will be with European Union countries, but clearly we are selecting a number of countries with which we have strategic relations. Rather than just engaging with the European Union, we are going to go back to that sort of bilateral relationship, and all the conferences and summits that ensue. I hope you will be given additional resources. I very much concur with the Chairman. The task ahead of you in the coming years is enormous. I am slightly concerned to hear that you are bidding for only £10 million. I really hope the Chancellor is listening to all the new responsibilities and requirements you will have.
Sir Simon McDonald
Thank you, Mr Kawczynski. As you say, the way we do business will look as it used to. There will be more bilateral summitry. We never stopped with some countries—as you know, there has always been a regular summit with France. There used to be one with Germany, but it fell away in about 1990. We will look again at how to reinforce these key relationships when we are not sitting round the Coreper I and Coreper II tables with those countries every week.
Ian Murray
I want to talk a bit about expertise in the Foreign Office. I am intrigued by the phrase “more foreign, less office”, particularly in relation to the report that was published on the future of the FCO, which says that too many of the 4,000 FCO staff are based in London. What balance would you put on where staff should be based in London and overseas?
Sir Simon McDonald
As you point out, the balance has shifted somewhat in recent years. As you know, Mr Murray, UK-based is very much more expensive than locally engaged, because of the package that accompanies an officer on a posting overseas. I do not have an ideal in mind to strive to. What I strive for is embassies that are able to do the job that the Government and the country needs. In doing that job, our local staff have played a vital part. They have been grateful for and responded very well to the extra challenge and responsibility given to them. I don’t assume that the division that we have right now is not working.
Ian Murray
But are you happy with the balance?
Sir Simon McDonald
We have gone as far as I would wish to go in many countries where we have very small UK-based assets. All these posts, in the end, are the UK representation. It is important that they have not only UK leadership but, in key positions underneath the ambassador or high commissioner, there should also be a UK-based officer.
Ian Murray
That leads on to whether you, as the permanent secretary, feel there are any gaps overseas. I have just come back from the South Pacific. Many of the overseas territories there are very keen on having representation because of their profile and direct connection. Many felt the relationship was slightly diminished by not having a permanent representation. Are there any gaps that you feel we should be filling?
Sir Simon McDonald
We are represented in most of the world. We have 260 posts altogether around the world but, Mr Murray, you have been to a part of the world where our representation is relatively thinner, although we do have posts in Vanuatu, Fiji and Tonga.[1] We have to prioritise. I think the distribution of posts we have around the world is pretty robust and pretty well tracks where our main interests are.
Ian Murray
What, then, is the strategy for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office in trying to make it “more foreign, less office” if it is, in that sense, ultimately about resourcing?
Sir Simon McDonald
As you know, Mr Murray, that was a slogan. It encapsulates an idea; it is not the strategy of our Department. It reminds us that our focus should be overseas, which I think is fair enough. It reminds us that we are not there for bureaucracy’s sake. To that extent, it is a useful slogan.
Ian Murray
I probably should say that your overseas officers in Vanuatu, Solomon Islands and Fiji are doing a tremendous job but it highlights that those are significant jobs. I think your high commissioner in Fiji covers a third of the world’s landmass—or water mass.
Sir Simon McDonald
I was going to say the surface of the globe, perhaps, Mr Murray. A lot of it is water.
Ian Murray
Most of it is water, yes. Finally, with regard to the future FCO report, what is the reasoning behind re-badging desk officers as policy officers, and what kind of step change are you looking to make?
Sir Simon McDonald
The motive is how people see themselves. Policy is what we are about as a Department of State. Sometimes there is uncertainty about where policy is initiated or rests. We want to be very clear. This is not something for directors and above; this is something that starts in the engine room of the Foreign Office. I think this is a signal to our co-workers of the importance of their role.
Chair
So are you going to empower people who are straight in off the street to promote policy?
Sir Simon McDonald
We do not take people straight in off the street, Mr Chairman; we empower them when they are recruited and trained and begin working.
Stephen Gethins
I have a quick question on the back of Mr Murray’s questioning. There are obviously a number of UK citizens working in the European institutions with very significant skill sets. First, do you know what will happen to those UK citizens who work in European institutions and are there any plans to recruit them?
Sir Simon McDonald
I have a couple of points. One is that they have contracts with their employers in Brussels and they will continue even after the United Kingdom has left the European Union. It is significant that in the Commission there are still, in 2016, four Norwegians and one Icelander. That is a legacy of failed negotiations from the 1970s. The employer will abide by their contract. Personally, I would predict that promotion may become more difficult, but they are taken care of.
Mike Gapes
I have a quick follow up. Are you aware that there is quite a large number of people who have been living in Brussels for a considerable time who are now eligible for nationality of other EU states and are actively considering that at the moment as a result of the vote to leave the EU?
Sir Simon McDonald
I am aware; my brother is one of them.
Mr Holloway
Following up the point about posts from the hon. Member for Scotland—
Stephen Gethins
Which one?
Mr Holloway
I mean Mr Murray. Is there in some of these places a bit of an issue with DFID? I remember going to Kyrgyzstan, where there was a charming lady who was the DFID head. We did not have an embassy there, so she was basically treated like an ambassador. We went to Nepal, where there was a very able ambassador with three staff, yet he was very frustrated because DFID had 100 or 200 staff and he was the also-ran. Is there a problem out there in the world? Does there need to be a bit more of a realignment to make it clear that the Foreign Office is in charge?
Sir Simon McDonald
I visited Kathmandu myself earlier this year and saw some of what you sketch out. The key for me is that the ambassador or the high commissioner is the leader of the team on behalf of the whole of the Government—the whole of the official UK effort. That is our expectation as we send them. That is the relationship we expect them to have with other colleagues—working closely and collaborating as colleagues, but under the leadership of the top man or woman.
Mr Holloway
Some elbows need to be blunted, then. Can you tell us a little more about the Diplomatic Academy, what it does and when you might go there? Is it like Sandhurst with its staff college? How does it work?
Sir Simon McDonald
You can visit it this afternoon, Mr Holloway—it has its main offices in Downing Street east, in our main building. It was set up two years ago in response to the need, which was identified by the Committee and others, for the diplomatic service to be more systematic about its training. It now has 12 different faculties. We have foundation level in all 12. We are rolling out practitioner level this year. I took part in the launch of the “Understanding the United Kingdom” practitioner level last week with Lord Hennessy. More and more people are engaging with the academy. I draw your attention to two parts of its work, the first of which is languages and the relationship with our language centre. That is a vital skill for British diplomats. We are being more systematic about our training and our use of languages. As part of Diplomacy 20:20, we are reminding our colleagues that once we train them in a language, we as an organisation want to make repeated use of that skill over a career, because it is an expensive investment. The second area is programme management, which has become an increasingly important part of our work, and more people in the diplomatic service need to acquire and keep up to date that set of skills.
Mr Holloway
On languages, I remember as a child going to the embassy in Tokyo and being amazed by how almost everyone on the embassy staff spoke Japanese. It was extraordinary. In 2007 or 2008, I asked a series of parliamentary questions, from which we gathered that there was not a single fluent Pashto speaker in Afghanistan, even though we had been engaged in that country for five or six years. About the only fluent Pashto speaker was a Gurkha officer called Ed Brandler, who was sent after a six-month tour to go and do a junior manning job in Glasgow. How have things improved now? Tell us a little bit about your TLA. I think that is the jargon.
Sir Simon McDonald
It means target language attainment. I can tell you that in Tokyo, the ambassador is so fluent that he tweets in Japanese and writes haiku in Japanese. I think that is a test. His successor, who arrives just after Christmas, has been retraining in Japanese for the whole of this year, so I expect that we will be led by fluent speakers in Japan in the future. As for Afghanistan, it happens that on my left is the most recent British ambassador to Afghanistan. I think Karen can update you.
Mr Holloway
How many fluent Pashto speakers do you reckon we have now?
Karen Pierce
I am afraid you will be disappointed. We do not have any UK staff who speak Pashto, because not being in Helmand, we have much less need for that.
Mr Holloway
How many speak Dari?
Karen Pierce
When I left, we had two fluent Dari speakers, but one of them was, sadly, medevacked, and I do not yet know whether he has been replaced by a speaker.
Mr Holloway
On the Afghan one—I know it was a while ago, but it is a systematic thing—how could we get to a stage across all these Government Departments where we were engaged in war, and had been for five or six years, and didn’t have anyone speaking the local language? [Interruption.] Sitting suspended for a Division in the House. On resuming—
Mr Holloway
What I was asking was, notwithstanding Ms Pierce’s comments about there being some people elsewhere who spoke Pashto, how could we have got to the point where we knew what we were doing and we had been there for a while, but we just did not have a pipeline of people speaking useful languages?
Sir Simon McDonald
The chief operating officer has personal experience and she will expand on that. One other point is that the ambassador, Dominic Jermey, is a Dari speaker. The ambassador speaks the main language of the part of Afghanistan where the embassy is.
Mr Holloway
But for future lessons, how could we have got to where we were 10 years ago?
Sir Simon McDonald
The pipeline was sufficiently robust that we have an ambassador who is a speaker. Karen, you have more to add.
Karen Pierce
I used to give speeches in Pashto and Dari. I used to memorise them and go through them with one of our instructors—an interpreter. A lot of colleagues in the embassy would learn Dari when they got to Afghanistan. Certainly some of the British staff dealing with bits of the Afghan system that would not generally speak English—a lot of the NDS and a lot of the NCA people—would learn Dari and use it in their everyday communication. A lot of them would spend most of each day with their Afghan counterparts. From my perspective, if I was seeing Government Ministers, the vast majority of the Cabinet would speak English, and very good English. We also had very good interpreters, as did the MOD when they were down in Helmand. Although it is obviously good when dealing with parliamentarians and wider outreach if we have a pool of speakers who can get right in under the skin of the country, I always found there was a sufficient number of people who understood and spoke English such that I did not personally feel hampered in transacting business.
Mr Holloway
But going back to 2006 or 2007, or whenever it is I am referring to, how did we get to the point—five or six years after basically going to war, and having a big task originally to help with reconstruction and whatever it morphed into—of having nobody speaking the main language of the insurgency that the Foreign Office was taking the lead on? Was that “less office, more foreign”? Is that what was going on then?
Karen Pierce
We had analysts back in the UK in a variety of locations who spoke both languages, and we were in close touch with people who were British but not Government servants, who travelled a lot to Afghanistan and spoke both languages. At the time, given the difficulties of deployment, our predecessors concluded that teaching Dari to staff who were not in the country for very long was not as important as finding these other contacts and ensuring that the analysts had the language.
Mr Holloway
That was another problem—length of tour.
Chair
While we are on languages, do you know how many speakers you have of each language? For example, if I asked you how many German speakers there are, would it be pretty straightforward to retrieve that information and would you know how quickly you could redeploy them to an urgent task?
Sir Simon McDonald
I can tell you that we have 660 language speaker slots in the network right now, and we monitor their target language attainment. The pool of speakers is held in our Prism—our management information system. Chief operating officer, can you help?
Karen Pierce
This year, we have trained 29 staff to speak Arabic, 28 to speak French, 16 to speak Mandarin, 28 in Russian and 17 in Spanish. I do not have the German figures, but it is easy enough to pull them off the system and let you have them. The ones I have given you are the languages you need in the United Nations—the official languages of the UN.
Chair
Right. Do you know how quickly you can deploy them from your central database?
Karen Pierce
Yes. If today there was a need for expeditionary diplomacy in a remote country where the languages that we speak were needed, we could pull that database off within minutes.
Chair
When you say there are 660 language posts—
Sir Simon McDonald
Speaker slots—jobs in the diplomatic network that require a UK-based officer who speaks the language of the country in order to do that job.
Chair
Isn’t that rather a low number, given your service? How strong is the service?
Sir Simon McDonald
We have about 4,000 officers overseas. Many of those, as you know, are in English-speaking countries, including very big English-speaking countries.
Chair
Will that 660 be a subset of that 4,000?
Sir Simon McDonald
Yes.
Chair
So you have then got additional locally recruited staff who have language skills?
Sir Simon McDonald
Yes. That figure does not capture local staff. All our local staff speak the language of the country in which they are working.
Chair
Do they? There are lots of English people who are based in your mission in Beijing. I was not completely certain that their Mandarin would be—
Sir Simon McDonald
A fair correction, Mr Chairman. In principle we look for speakers, but we cannot succeed in that objective in all countries, particularly Category A security countries.
Chair
I want to ask you about classified matters and local people. I was struck when going to Bratislava that we have two UK-based diplomats. The difficulty of them sustaining the workload that related to classified matters seemed rather obvious, quite apart from the fact that it seemed extraordinary that there is a European Union state in which we had two British-based diplomats.
Sir Simon McDonald
You will be glad to note that, for the Slovak presidency of the EU right now, we have increased the number of UK-based staff—we now have four or five in Bratislava, but that coincides with the presidency. This is part of the review I have already referred to: in a number of partner states, we made the ambassador more junior and reduced the number of UK-based, so it is those countries in particular at which the extra resource is directed.
Chair
Can we turn to the Diplomatic Academy? How much diplomacy does it teach?
Sir Simon McDonald
What do you mean?
Chair
Does it give courses in diplomacy?
Sir Simon McDonald
It gives courses in tradecraft. Negotiating is one such, and—
Chair
What—contact-making, networking skills, tough talking and all that stuff is done by the academy?
Sir Simon McDonald
How to be a diplomat, yes.
Karen Pierce
Supplemented by masterclasses given by people like us to more junior colleagues. We also invite alumni back to help with those masterclasses, so you get more than an academic approach.
Chair
Do you think “academy” is slightly stretching a point in the title when there is no permanent academic faculty, no journal and no professional qualification? It is just really a series of training courses—a lot of them e-training—that people sign up to.
Sir Simon McDonald
But it is in its early days, and it is an indication of our ambition. We plan to build on what we have started and we are already looking for external validation of the courses and qualifications we give. At foundation level we have City & Guilds, which as you know is a relatively easy validation, but as we look at the practitioner and expert level we are looking for heavyweight academic partners.
Chair
What is your ambition for this?
Sir Simon McDonald
My ambition is that if you get an expert-level qualification from the Diplomatic Academy, it will have been validated by a university so it will be the equivalent of a degree or a master’s qualification—something like that.
Chair
Wouldn’t it be nice to have a real academic institution—a proper college or university—hosting a diplomatic academy?
Sir Simon McDonald
I think it is a real one, but it is in its early days—
Chair
But is it your ambition to take it there?
Sir Simon McDonald
The ambition is to provide a centre of excellence where not only British diplomats but other people from across Government working in the overseas policy space can train and acquire qualifications that are validated and therefore worth something outside the Foreign Office. At the moment, our training is internal, so my board would be impressed if you had done a qualification through the Diplomatic Academy. Ideally, later it will have wider currency. I think that would help its prestige and it would help the organisation.
Chair
Mr Holloway and I were both soldiers. We came out of an institutional framework where training was incredibly important. You had officer training, junior staff courses, senior staff courses, and the Foreign Office always had a sense of the gifted amateur and brilliant people being recruited. Now they are going to be doing policy from the moment they descend on a desk.
Sir Simon McDonald
They would be contributing to policy.
Chair
In this era of professionalisation there is an opportunity to do something. Given the quality of people you have, their ongoing training would presumably be lined up with the best educational institutions in the UK.
Sir Simon McDonald
That is the objective. We are learning from what the military have done and we are conscious of not doing well enough, so we are addressing it. It will take time. The start has been good. The service has responded. We have just got our staff survey results for 2016. On learning development, it is up to 60%, which is much higher than most Departments in Whitehall.
Karen Pierce
May I add to that list, Chairman? We also participate in external learning courses. The Diplomatic Academy and our research analysts will run tie-ups with various academic institutions. I did a master’s at LSE through the Foreign Office. Within Whitehall, some work is going on through the new learning and leadership board to take the best of the MOD courses and Shrivenham and the best of our Diplomatic Academy and make them more widely available across Whitehall. That is very much in its infancy, but we want to see what more can be done collectively.
Chair
Is there work to be done with any of the agencies in this area?
Sir Simon McDonald
We share some training, yes.
Mr Holloway
Obviously, you have the language skills, but for the other bit of it, what did you use to do in the past before you had this academy? What did you two do? You are very senior now. What training did you have?
Sir Simon McDonald
It feels like a confession, Mr Holloway. A lot of the training was on the job—the most valuable training. Most training models acknowledge that what you do by seeing it done is the majority of training. In my first two jobs overseas I worked very closely with the ambassador as a sort of private secretary. I learned the trade in Jeddah and Riyadh and Bonn. In addition, there was language training, so I was taught Arabic and German by the Foreign Office. Other training was done through the Civil Service College, which now has a virtual existence rather than a physical one. That change in the overall Whitehall environment caused us to rethink. We have more specific needs. The diplomatic service has different training needs from the home civil service, so we have got a hold of our own training. As I keep stressing, we have made a start. We think it’s a good start, but we are not even halfway into this journey.
Mr Holloway
May I be slightly controversial, probably very unfair and certainly very unscientific? You continue to have extremely able people who can argue anything and think through anything. You still get the brightest and the best. Is there some sense in which, in recent years, the Foreign Office has been somewhat diminished? I can’t speak for my colleagues, but in the last 12 years or so, I have been in embassies and consulates around the world. I have been blown away sometimes by the extraordinary people that you have, but I have also occasionally thought, “Wow. That is just terrible.” I’m thinking of a few of the ambassadors we had in the early days in Kabul. It’s a stupid thing, but I remember a consul in one of the Emirates being affronted when I kindly reminded him that his top button was undone and he was entertaining Emiratis. I don’t know—is there anything in that?
Sir Simon McDonald
I feel that you have become very anecdotal in the point you are making.
Mr Holloway
I can only be anecdotal. I can’t be scientific.
Sir Simon McDonald
I will grab hold of the key point you made at the beginning, which is that the diplomatic service continues to attract the brightest and the best. We have exceptional people. I accept that it is not everywhere—we know that—but the standard is very high, and our objective is to bring everybody to that high standard.
Ann Clwyd
In April, the Committee said that the FCO’s budget should be doubled or trebled in the event of a vote for Brexit. Given the other foreign policy challenges that have emerged since the referendum, we would expect the FCO to receive a significant increase in funding in tomorrow’s autumn statement. What are you expecting?
Sir Simon McDonald
I expect the Chancellor to set out a difficult financial backdrop. As you know, Ms Clwyd, he has already spoken in public about eye-watering levels of debt. The task, given the backdrop for the country, is tough, and we will be affected by that. We got a decent settlement in the spending round last autumn. It is my task and the task of my board to make the best of it. We are, as I have already said, building a case for more. We are grateful for the support that the Committee and others give us in that task, but we are realistic.
Ann Clwyd
You don’t want to hazard a guess, do you?
Sir Simon McDonald
I am hopeful that the joint bid with DIT will give us some more money for extra trade policy officers in the network.
Chair
How much has come off your bottom line because of the personnel changes?
Sir Simon McDonald
Because of the transfer to DExEU, in particular?
Andrew Sanderson
It will be about £2 million to £3 million, I think. It is a relatively small transfer. The details will be finalised with a supplementary estimate. The work will go with the people, so the net effect should be—
Sir Simon McDonald
It is mostly their salaries.
Chair
Do you anticipate all that capability returning when Brexit is over?
Sir Simon McDonald
Yes.
Chair
So there will be an uptick in the bottom line.
Sir Simon McDonald
Yes.