§ 2.45 p.m.
§ The Earl of Carlisle asked Her Majesty's Government
§ Why they are terminating the joint industrial and commercial attachments programme for British businesses in Russia and central and eastern Europe, and what they intend to put in its place.
§ Baroness AmosMy Lords, the programme is no longer appropriate to the department's priorities for helping the transition process in the region. We are supporting bilateral programmes tailored to country needs. Details are set out in published country strategy papers.
The Earl of CarlisleMy Lords, I thank the noble Baroness for her reply, which I find rather disappointing. Does the Minister agree that for a mere £5 million a year since 1990 over 900 United Kingdom companies have been active in 25 nations of the former Soviet empire and that their principal objective has been to provide managers with knowledge of British free market systems and business ethics, no doubt with a view to winning contracts in the short, medium and long term? Does the Minister also agree that the Department for International Development is taking an unusually short-sighted view of this matter? Will the noble 5 Baroness arrange for JICAP to be transferred to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office so that it can continue under the aegis of the British Council?
§ Baroness AmosMy Lords, I cannot agree with the noble Earl that the Government are taking a short-sighted view. Before the decision to stop the programme way taken there was an extremely wide-ranging ark comprehensive evaluation of it. That evaluation looked at the core objectives and also the contribution of the programme to the wider transition process in the region and its relationship with our priorities under the White Paper on international development. The result of the evaluation showed that the programme was not contributing much to the goal of enterprise restructuring. There was only patchy evidence of an improvement in enterprise performance, including the building of commercial links with UK companies. The estimate of the trade generated as a result of the programme was modest. Therefore, the decision was taken to look at bilateral programmes that would improve the performance and the relationship. It is not a short-sighted decision. Aid and support will continue but in a different form.
§ Baroness RawlingsMy Lords, I do not know when the programme to examine JICAP was carried out. However, does the Minister agree that this is definitely not the moment to stop the funding of JICAP which has been so successful, especially to countries like Bulgaria which have suffered so much since the Kosovo war? Does she also agree that this is exactly the kind of organisation that can be of tremendous help in the reconstruction of the Balkans after the war?
§ Baroness AmosMy Lords, as I said in my reply to the supplementary Question of the noble Earl, we are looking at alternative ways to support and build the enterprise culture in those countries. The evaluation showed clearly that the core objectives that had been set and their relationship with the priorities of the department were not being met through this particular kind of funding mechanism. We shall continue with management training and look at such matters as mentoring, networking and building relationships between companies and partnerships across countries. That work will continue, but this particular programme is not meeting the objectives we set.
§ Lord Campbell of AllowayMy Lords, has the British Council been consulted on this matter? If not, might it be?
§ Baroness AmosMy Lords, as part of the evaluation of the programme, British Councils in the United Kingdom and overseas were consulted. A number of participants on the programme and their employer organisations were also consulted. A number of questionnaires were sent to companies within the United Kingdom which acted as hosts to those participants. So the evaluation was wide ranging. We spoke to a range of stakeholders, including the CBI and the DTI.
The Earl of CarlisleMy Lords, the Minister informed us that her department was looking at 6 alternative ways to proceed. Would it not be wiser to avoid cutting this admirable scheme at the end of the month until alternative ways have been put in place? Otherwise it will send the wrong signals to the Russian Federation and the other 24 countries that we have been supporting.
§ Baroness AmosMy Lords, I say again that I cannot agree with the noble Earl. We have developed country strategy papers with individual countries such as Bulgaria where we set out clearly the kind of support we expect to give. We have developed a Russian president's management initiative which will involve over 500 management trainees and a budget of £5 million over three years as an example of what can be done. It is a more complex programme involving business school training. It has company attachments and a teacher capacity building element as well as coaching and mentoring. So we are finding alternative ways of ensuring that management training takes place and that the relationship between British business and those countries continues but in a different way.
§ The Earl of LauderdaleMy Lords, can the Minister tell us when those countries which are members of NATO will start to prepare a plan to repair the wicked damage which has been done in the bombing?
§ Baroness AmosMy Lords, the noble Earl may be referring to the next Question. However, there is a great deal of ongoing discussion among the international financial institutions as well as the other countries about the long-term reconstruction of the region.