§ 2.47 p.m.
§ Lord Alport asked Her Majesty's Government:
§ What financial support they will provide for the Commonwealth Institute.
§ The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Baroness Chalker of Wallasey)My Lords, on 21st September my right honourable friend the Foreign Secretary announced with regret the decision to conclude grant support for the Commonwealth Institute at the end of the financial year 1995–96. A grant of approximately £3 million will continue to be available in 1994–95 and 1995–96.
§ Lord AlportMy Lords, I thank my noble friend for her Answer. Is she aware that, in contrast to the dedication and inspiration which Her Majesty the Queen has given to the Commonwealth during the more than 40 years of her reign, there has been an increasing impression, both in the Commonwealth and here, that successive British Governments over the past 15 years have begun to regard the Commonwealth as a liability and embarrassment? Does my noble friend realise that the action taken at this time will further enhance that impression? Will she use her considerable influence to see that what is—in my view at any rate and, I think, in the view of many people in both Houses—a mistaken decision is reversed?
§ Baroness Chalker of WallaseyMy Lords, while I cannot agree with my noble friend's last comment, the decision which we had to take does not signify any decline in our interest in the Commonwealth. I wish to pay tribute to the excellent work done by the Commonwealth Institute and the valuable support given by its board. The Foreign Secretary reaffirmed our support for the Commonwealth yet again in his lecture to the English Speaking Union on 14th October.
The Commonwealth is a force for promoting good government and democracy. We have seen that example well promoted during the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting in Cyprus. However, the plain fact is that the building itself has been a problem for a long 844 while. The attempt to obtain money to redevelop the site with the Commonwealth Institute, which went on for nearly two years, fell. Now we have to look for a new way to make the Commonwealth Institute a viable proposition in the future. Nevertheless, under the existing pressure, I cannot see that Her Majesty's Government can change their mind on the issue.
§ Baroness DavidMy Lords, is the Minister aware of the great enthusiasm shown by large numbers of children for the exhibitions and excellent educational projects which are put on by the institute? As the noble Baroness said, a warm tribute was paid to them by the Foreign Secretary. If, as is planned, the funding is cut off, can the Minister tell us what proposals will be put forward to produce some kind of educational support so that all the good work is not lost?
§ Baroness Chalker of WallaseyMy Lords, even the number of children visitors to the institute has sadly declined in recent years. However, I believe that the institute still has a part to play. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office grant has been 85 per cent. of the institute's budget and because the financial support from the remainder of the Commonwealth, at approximately 1.5 per cent. (but frequently in arrears), is so negligible, we have a real problem. The work that is now being done by the Director General of the Commonwealth Institute to find a new way forward will have our support. We hope to find ways of making sure that the educational work can continue, but we have to seek new ways.
§ Lord Braine of WheatleyMy Lords, my noble friend the Minister will of course be aware that the noble Lord, Lord Armstrong, in his detailed quinquennial review of the Commonwealth Institute, concluded that he certainly could not recommend closure of this unique and forward-looking organisation, although at the moment it seems almost inevitable that in the long run that will be its fate. Can my noble friend explain why an institution which the noble Lord, Lord Armstrong, described as,
a highly visible statement of Britain's commitment to the modem Commonwealth",is at risk, and why the governors and the trustees, of whom I am one, have not met with the Minister round the table to discuss this parlous situation?
§ Baroness Chalker of WallaseyMy Lords, I do not recall the exact date on which my noble friend became a trustee. But I know that over the past six years there have been repeated attempts to find a way to spread the funding of the institute beyond the 85 per cent. dependence upon the Government. That has not succeeded, partly due to the recession. The noble Lord, Lord Armstrong, in his review, indeed found that the institute's role complemented government policy. But the noble Lord said that he doubted that the role could be sustained without increased financial support, and conceded that a decision was ultimately a matter of priorities. What he did discount, however, was a continuation of the status quo. That is the situation with which, sadly, we have to deal. However, I have not given up hope of finding ways, with the board and with 845 the director general, of having the Commonwealth Institute give support to education for children, and also to the Commonwealth in general, in new ways for the future. We shall have two-and-a-half years in which we intend to find that way forward.
§ Lord Taylor of BlackburnMy Lords, does the Minister not find it very sad to make this announcement, especially in the centenary year of the institute? Would it not surely have been right for alternative arrangements to have been made before an announcement was made in this way, causing great concern to many educational establishments? Does the Minister agree that, regardless of what she has already said about the figures declining, over the past two or three months since Her Majesty the Queen went to the institute in May, there has been an increase in the number of people who have attended?
§ Baroness Chalker of WallaseyMy Lords, I find the matter as painful as does any other Member of this House. Not only do I believe in the Commonwealth, but I believe that we have a role for a Commonwealth Institute. But there is no doubt that the sums which the building itself requires—I might tell noble Lords that we spent £600,000 last year alone on health and safety work—and all the sums involved, mean that we must look at a more economical way of managing for the future. That is something that we intend to do, but we cannot go on allowing it to have 85 per cent. dependence on government grant.
§ Baroness FlatherMy Lords, will my noble friend the Minister please correct a misconception resulting from statements made by her right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth affairs, that the budget for the grant comes out of the aid budget? I am sure that my noble friend will agree that it will be an enormous help if we all know that it does not come out of the aid budget. Perhaps I may also add that I am extremely disappointed at the outcome of the Armstrong Review: that was not what was on the cards when we saw the review.
§ Baroness Chalker of WallaseyMy Lords, I must say to my noble friend that while I realise that in the overall numbers £3 million may not be a huge sum, it is significant when the FCO diplomatic vote, as my noble friend rightly says, is under great pressure.
I realise that many noble Lords are disappointed that the review did not come up with a way of saving the situation. But the review did not. The most telling words in what the noble Lord, Lord Armstrong, said were that he discounted a continuation of the status quo, which he found unsatisfactory. We must deal with this matter in a new way, as we sought to do in 1989. We are only sad that that attempt did not succeed. We now have the impetus, indeed the necessity, to deal with this in a new way so that the Commonwealth spirit in the institute may continue.
§ Lord Graham of EdmontonAfter this one!
§ Lord JuddMy Lords, does the Minister agree that if the FCO is genuinely at one with the Prime Minister in his recent statement that the conference in Cyprus has established a new sense of purpose in the Commonwealth, this is an extraordinary time at which to announce withdrawal of support for the institute. Does it not inevitably send contradictory signals to the world? At a time when ethnic and religious intolerance is spreading throughout the world, the multi-racial Commonwealth surely has a crucial role to play. Why are the Government not supporting the institute in the educational work that it is undertaking to build up the Commonwealth at this critical time in human history?
§ Baroness Chalker of WallaseyMy Lords, I must say to the noble Lord that there would never have been a right time to change this matter. It is interesting that when 70 per cent. of Britain's bilateral aid goes to the Commonwealth countries, we are forced, by real, sensible decision-taking, to look at ways in which the Commonwealth Institute may be reconstituted anew. I believe that the Foreign Secretary is best placed to decide on his department's priorities. I am sure that the institute's many friends throughout the Commonwealth will help. But it is notable that even last week in Cyprus this matter did not feature in the communiqué.