14
Examination of witnesses
Shirley Botchwey, Kwabena Osei-Danquah and Rajiv Babooram.
The Chair: Welcome, everyone. Good morning and thank you very much indeed to the Secretary-General of the Commonwealth for coming and presenting to us today to follow up on the inquiry we are engaged in to try to understand how the UK can best take advantage and/or mitigate against trade in a turbulent world. We are joined by the honourable Shirley Botchwey, Ambassador Kwabena Osei-Danquah, who is Chief of Staff to the Secretary-General, and Rajiv Babooram, Adviser and Head, Commonwealth Connectivity Agenda, Economic Development, Trade and Investment Directorate. Thank you very much indeed, the three of you, for joining us.
We have had a number of sessions so far, which are starting to lead us to the realisation that we need to be thinking laterally if we are to take advantage of the future and create strong trade opportunities, not simply looking at traditional FTAs. We are looking forward to hearing how we can work closely with your organisation. I should probably say that I was for a brief period on the board of the Commonwealth Enterprise and Investment Council, although I relinquished that some while ago, and I passionately believe in the power of the Commonwealth to create trade within it and certainly to benefit the UK by having closer links. I am keen to hear how we could do that and feed that into our report. Lord German, will you ask the first question?
Lord German: In doing so, I declare an interest in that I am the Honorary Consul for the Kingdom of Lesotho in Wales. It is the first time they have had a parliamentarian doing that job.
Q1 I wonder if you could start by looking at where the Commonwealth sits in this world-based order, and if you could say a few words about what added value the Commonwealth can bring to the international system of trade and treaties and agreements, and perhaps also whether you think you are being supported effectively by the UK Government in that role.
Shirley Botchwey: Thank you very much. I must register my thanks to the committee for giving us the opportunity to engage with you. Pertinent questions, I believe, will be asked today, and the discussion, I am quite sure, will go a long way to position even better the UK’s role in the Commonwealth, especially at this difficult time that we all find ourselves in, when there is so much uncertainty. There are attacks on the traditional multilateral system.
In my opinion, where the Commonwealth sits, I see more opportunity than challenges. It is no longer the case that we always view the Commonwealth with nostalgia or with the history that we all share, some of which is not that pleasant. I am an optimist and I want to see where we go from here, so for me this opportunity is one that we need to seize. Especially since it is a fact that what used to be the case when development assistance was enjoyed by many countries is no longer the case.
Therefore, for me, where we are going with the Commonwealth in the next five years, through our strategic plan, is what we believe will bring shared prosperity and sustainable development to the 2.7 billion people who form the Commonwealth. We have 56 countries at different levels of development and different in terms of population, with some countries as low as 10,000 or 17,000, and some with as much as 1.4 billion. On economies, we have countries like the UK, developed economies that sit on the G7 and the G20, and some countries that describe themselves as dots on the map.
For me, where we come in is to ensure that we bring every country, regardless of size, to the table. Our strategic plan, which is looking at building resilience—democratic resilience, economic resilience through trade and investment, as well as climate resilience—is one that I believe will take us as close as possible to the promised land. We may not be an institution like the WTO, and we should not be such an institution, but we do have convening power, we do have the power to build capacity for our nations, we do have the power to advocate on behalf of our nations and we do have the power to bring countries together to share best practice and give them technical assistance.
In a nutshell, I am saying that our role has been enhanced because of all that is happening. Because countries can no longer rely on the established institutions, they are looking to the Commonwealth, especially the least developed countries amongst us, the Small Island Developing States, the small states and the developing countries. This is where we are at the moment. I see opportunity, and opportunity can only happen, in my opinion, through trade and investment. I hope that the UK will take the opportunity as it presents itself. Maybe I will stop here and then in other questions I can elaborate.
The Chair: That was a very good introduction. We might come back on some of those. Lord Anderson had a follow-up.
Q2 Lord Anderson of Swansea: Your Excellency, one of the best contributions made over the years by your predecessors has been the positive use of the good offices, the authority of the Secretary-General. I think of the excellent Chief Emeka Anyaoku dealing with southern Africa. Are there occasions when you have used that authority and intend to do so, particularly on the trade side, given the free trade agreements that have already been reached and so on?
Shirley Botchwey: The good offices of the Secretary-General, I believe, is a powerful tool. It is a tool that is usually executed quietly because, most of the time, it has to do with infractions of democracy, democratic values and principles by member states. That is a big chunk of how it is used. When countries go rogue, so to speak, whether it is infractions of the rule of law, human rights, abuse of democratic institutions and so on, this is how you go behind the scenes. In the past, we have had to quietly write to Heads of State when we believe that there have been issues of the Executive interfering in other arms of government and so on.
With regards to trade, we would usually not use the good offices. We would go under the trade and investment arm of the Commonwealth, where we would help countries strengthen their trade institutions and their debt management units. We have about 40 countries at the moment that are using our debt management systems. These are countries that find a lot of value in the debt management systems of the Commonwealth that they use, even to the point where now some non-Commonwealth countries are using the debt management systems.
We are also looking, as a Commonwealth, at how to increase trade and investment. As of 2024, we stood at under $900 billion in intra-Commonwealth trade. Now we have what could be described as an understanding to increase it to $2 trillion by 2030. That is probably overambitious, but it is a rallying call for countries to look at how best we can all work together.
Fortunately for us, we have a CHOGM—Heads of Government meeting—coming up from 1 to 4 November. Trade and investment is one area where all the countries are in agreement that we need to increase trade and is one of the key areas that will be discussed by the Heads of Government. We will put across what we plan to do.
We are working with the Commonwealth Investment Network, putting private sector to the needs of Governments in gaps where they need investment. We are working with the CWEIC to ensure that the private sector is engaged and is involved in the countries. We are preparing the countries as well, where it is needed, for them to step up on identifying their needs so that we can match them with bankable projects.
This CHOGM will be a bit different, because we are inviting, as part of the Heads of Government meeting, regional development banks and multilateral development banks. Of course, we will still have the business forum, where the private sector will be involved and will engage directly with Heads of Government and Ministers. It will be a bit different in terms of the regional banks, multilateral banks and the private sector engaging directly with the Heads of Government so that, hopefully, they will leave with some understanding and with some value on what they need and whether these banks can indeed help.
We have also proposed a trade agenda for decision by Heads of State, like I said, during the CHOGM. These are some of the different things we are doing. This CHOGM is not about Heads of State just coming to read their statements and leave, it is more about ensuring that we put them together with the issues that plague them, issues to do with development, finance and all that.
The Chair: Lord German, do you have a follow-up on your question?
Q3 Lord German: You have described the opportunities you see and your journey to 2030 and $2 trillion is very ambitious indeed. I wonder if you could say something about the challenges that you face as well as the opportunities, given that throughout the world we have been looking at the rules-based system, its fragmentation, the tariffs and the pressures on multilateral organisations such as the Commonwealth. How do you assess, as a Commonwealth, the challenges to bringing your journey to $2 trillion, as you described it?
Shirley Botchwey: I believe that to increase trade and investment must be intentional, and that is where we come in. If you take the small states, the Small Island Developing States, the least developed countries, they do not have the capacity. Capacity is one of the shortcomings that comes to the fore immediately, and not just the capacity but also, because of their size, they are not heard in international fora for their issues to be included in major decision-making. That is where we also come in, to make sure that we prepare them. I spoke about building their capacity. We do that through the Commonwealth small states offices. There is one in New York and there is one in Geneva. In Geneva, we have trade advisors. We have trade advisors in some of the countries as well. These trade advisors help the countries in their negotiations, whether it is negotiation with companies or negotiation with countries.
A typical example I can give is when we woke up one day and tariffs had been weaponised. A lot of countries were slapped with tariffs, yet they did not even know how to negotiate with these big powers. We had to come in, in some instances, to assist them.
When we are going for WTO meetings, as another example, we bring Ministers together. We bring together officials, trade officials and those who need advice. We help them with advice. We help them with negotiation. We help them craft a position because, of course, we have the convening power. We are always able to build consensus. We come in in that respect as well. We provide that platform for dialogue. Views are exchanged, experiences are shared and we come up with one position.
It can be difficult, and that is one challenge that we find. Due to the varied strengths of the different countries that I have spoken about, it can be difficult, but then the Commonwealth is known for coming together and finding common ground, even with difficult situations. That is what I can say on some of the challenges we face.
The UK has been supportive, and the UK pushed for trade to be put high on the agenda. However, some countries do not see it as something that should gain our attention, for us to do something about, but we all see the need for it. Development assistance has gone down considerably. Countries can develop only through trade, through digital trade, through services, and we are seeing more countries supporting it. Broadly, we have a lot of support from the countries.
We are working at how to move it forward, but we know for a fact that we are not close to a free trade area because we have regional trade agreements within the Commonwealth. We have the African Continental Free Trade Area. We have the one in the Pacific, the PACER Plus. We have several others. We have trilateral trade agreements and bilateral trade agreements. We are not looking to create a free trade area at this point, but we need to look at non-tariff barriers. How do we work with countries to ensure that, for instance, custom documents and standards are harmonised? These are little wins that, if we are able to get through with countries, would ease trade.
The watchword here, I believe, is easing trade rather than creating a free trade area. I believe that somewhere in the future—not the near future—we will reach a point where it will be obvious that this is the time for a free trade area but, for now, we need to use the building blocks, the few that I have mentioned.
The Chair: I will ask Baroness Anelay and then Lord Boateng to ask their slightly overlapping questions. Feel free to adapt them according to what we have heard.
Q4 Baroness Anelay of St Johns: Okay. Can I build on your previous explanation? Thank you very much indeed, your Excellency, for being here to give this evidence to us. You have set out carefully what you and your colleagues can do, against the background of trying to support a rules-based system in trade. Clearly, you are not in a position to be able to make agreements with Heads of State per se but, from what you have been saying, you have done a lot of work on ensuring that your colleagues who have expertise in trade and the law—I know you have been a lawyer yourself—are guiding countries to derisk and remove complexity in how they work with other countries.
Can I ask you two questions on that? First, you referred to the Small Island Developing States, the SIDS, and the work you are doing in both New York and Geneva. The UK was always strong in supporting that. Have you continued to feel that support? Can you let us know what the position is with the UK Government about their role in supporting the activity that you are promoting, which is enabling countries that cannot do it all themselves but they can have your expertise? That is one question.
The second question is, against the background, as you say to us, understandably, that now is not the moment for an FTA, and against the background that the UK is looking to other mechanisms to engage in trade, because FTAs take so long, what kinds of instruments do you find most useful to recommend to the members of the Commonwealth?
Shirley Botchwey: On the UK’s role, I believe the UK has been supportive. If you ask me whether it is enough, no. I wish we could see more support on the advice and on the extra budgetary resources that are available to us.
Here I must say that the UK has stepped up, but more is needed. Oliver Twist is asking for more. We are in this together. However, the countries that must support must do so—I am trying to be diplomatic here—without feeling that their support, overly so, will be misconstrued as trying to be the master, so to speak. It is needed, the countries need it, and I am asking for more involvement.
I am asking for the UK also to step up when it comes to speaking on behalf of Commonwealth countries. It is okay to do so. I know that in the House of Lords, in the Commons and elsewhere, the UK does its best to talk about the Commonwealth, but a lot more is needed. If it can be done, it will be useful to us.
The UK could also support the work programme for tariff elimination during the CHOGM, because it is something that will come up. The UK has, as you said, a lot of bilateral trade agreements, but not with all the countries. All the countries need to come together for us to increase trade, digital trade and other areas. For me, it is extremely important that the voice of the UK be heard.
We are before the House of Lords, so we are limited to the UK, but I would like to see some other countries, the big countries, also speak up when it comes to the Commonwealth and act in support of the Commonwealth, so that other countries that otherwise would be left out can also be part of what we are trying to achieve on increasing trade and investment.
Q5 The Chair: There was an interesting supplementary about trade instruments. We are in a lot of debate at the moment because the FTA principle is being slightly superseded by MoUs, letters of intent and other less formal agreements, which we have two views on. First, they do not get enough scrutiny. On the other hand, they are flexible ways to achieve sectoral-specific outcomes, which, particularly with digital, pharmaceutical and so on, is quite useful.
I would be grateful for your steer on that, because we are particularly looking at it. Are you advising your members to undertake MoUs or letters of intent and, if so, in what sectors, particularly given the fact that a Commonwealth free trade area looks like a slightly distant vision?
Shirley Botchwey: MoUs or LoIs on trade agreements?
The Chair: Inter-country bilateral agreements and so on. Or do you still push for the formalised FTAs?
Shirley Botchwey: I have absolutely nothing against bilateral or regional agreements, because I believe they will eventually be the building blocks towards a free trade area. It will be chipping off. If you take standardisation of documents for the countries, that is one area that we can achieve. If we can come up with a model law on digital trade, that is one area. On services, that is one area. On customs documents too.
I have asked the secretariat to look at the elements that run through all the agreements we have, not just with the UK but with other countries, the agreements that exist, so that we can use those agreements. It would be much easier, if elements run through all the agreements, for countries to adopt them. That will move us slowly towards a free trade area, if you want to say that.
The Chair: That was helpful. Baroness Anelay.
Q6 Baroness Anelay of St Johns: Your Excellency, which countries do you feel give you the greatest pushback in trying to create a bilateral free trade landscape across the Commonwealth? Does the UK have better relationships with particular areas? How do you utilise our relationship within the Commonwealth for the ones that perhaps push back? It is a bit of a loaded question, and I am sorry, but there are a lot of countries.
Shirley Botchwey: Let me say that we will be negotiating the communique for the CHOGM, and that has several pages to do with trade. Already, some countries have started pushing back, and they are the big countries. Am I allowed to say?
Rajiv Babooram: I believe so.
Shirley Botchwey: Countries such as Canada—
Rajiv Babooram: We should not—
Shirley Botchwey: We cannot mention names. Okay.
The Chair: Your Excellency, I understand that.
Shirley Botchwey: Can we expunge that? Some big countries that probably benefit from current bilateral arrangements are likely to push back.
The Chair: Thank you for that—moving from being a politician to a diplomat is a transition that we all take in these situations, but that is very helpful. Obviously, we are keen to see this organisation prosper and we want to promote free trade, so it is helpful also to look at where the blocks are so that we can then navigate around them.
Shirley Botchwey: Yes, the big countries, if you understand.
The Chair: Sure, that is understood. I do not think there is anything that would not be assumed there. Lord Boateng.
Q7 Lord Boateng: Secretary-General, thank you very much for giving evidence. It is great that someone with your extensive foreign policy experience is currently in post. Indeed, you are the first Secretary-General for many years to agree to give evidence to a Committee of this House, so we are grateful for that.
I have two questions. The first relates to the African Continental Free Trade Area. I have spent the last couple of days at events and a conference between the UK and Ghana where this has featured extensively. I wonder what more can be done by the Commonwealth as an entity to help operationalise the African Continental Free Trade Area. These agreements are all very well to sign up to, but we know that in the experience of a woman market trader who wants to travel to do business from Accra to Lagos, it is still hard for her to cross those boundaries, African Continental Free Trade Area or no African Continental Free Trade Area. I say “her” advisedly, because the experience of women crossing borders is much worse, frankly, than that of men. It is difficult for everybody, but women suffer specific harassment, as you well know. What can the Commonwealth do to help operationalise the African Continental Free Trade Area in practice?
Shirley Botchwey: That is an interesting question, and I am tempted to look at it more from a disaggregated Africa in terms of the regional economic communities of Africa. Let us not forget that we have 21 members of the Commonwealth in Africa. The work of the AfCFTA is of importance to us. I have already said that we are looking at taking the best practices of the different free trade areas for our work towards increasing trade and investment within the Commonwealth.
Coming back, the problem with AfCFTA to a large extent is the regional economic communities, and there are five of them: ECOWAS, SADC, EAC, the central ECCAS and then Maghreb. The question is whether these economic blocks are working as they should. They are not. They are not working as they should, although some are way ahead of others. This is where the AfCFTA has to look. Of course, there are issues to do with rules of origin and what they call the lists of what is included, what is not, and all that.
Even at the regional level, these are not working as they should. If you take ECOWAS, crossing into countries with goods and services is a major issue. It is the same in southern Africa, and we all know what is happening there at the moment. We can learn a lot in terms of what is not working within the AfCFTA. However, we can also learn a lot so that we will be able to increase intra-Commonwealth trade. For that reason, we have strong links and a strong working relationship with the AfCFTA.
Q8 Lord Boateng: The second question, Secretary-General, is one that I ask you not to feel constrained to be too diplomatic about because it is of real concern, not least to the 21 African members of the Commonwealth to whom you referred in your last answer. It is the vexed question of Zimbabwe.
The reality is that the overwhelming majority of African members of the Commonwealth want Zimbabwe to be readmitted to the Commonwealth, not least because they believe that, in that way, they can not only improve the effectiveness of the trade agreement but also improve the experience of the continent and of Zimbabweans themselves on good governance and economic sustainable development. Yet, despite that desire on the part of the African members of the Commonwealth, Zimbabwe still has not been readmitted and, indeed, the process to reintegrate it back into the Commonwealth family of nations has stalled. Why is that, and when will it change?
Shirley Botchwey: The sentiment of the group is probably one that I can identify with. When I became Secretary-General, my thinking was to see how best to admit Zimbabwe and then work with Zimbabwe to ensure that all the shortcomings are worked on, because we do that well when it comes to the issues of democracy, free press, free speech, human rights and all that. We were on the verge of putting that across: “Let us admit Zimbabwe, put it on the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group, CMAG, and then accompany it in its journey towards making sure that all our values or as many of our values are adhered to.”
Then, soon after, before I could do anything, there was the issue of the third term, with the president being endorsed by his party and parliamentary group, and that tied my hands. I have made contact with Zimbabwe, and I even offered to send a team there to assess the situation, but nothing has happened so far.
I would like to see Zimbabwe back and for us to help it get on the straight and narrow, if we can describe it as that, because not many of our countries have issues.
Lord Boateng: Is the UK assisting you in that process?
Shirley Botchwey: Before I joined, there was a decision that went under the silence procedure on the readmission of Zimbabwe. However, it was broken. The silence was broken by the UK, supported by Canada.
Rajiv Babooram: They did send a Minister—
Lord Boateng: Once again, the UK and Canada seem to be calling the shots when it comes to this issue, not the African countries which are, after all, the most closely affected by it.
The Chair: I do not want to embarrass anyone.
Shirley Botchwey: The UK, if I can come in, did go to Zimbabwe. The UK Minister for the Commonwealth went to Zimbabwe and engaged with the Government, but soon after, there was a reshuffle and he was moved. It is a worry for me.
Lord Boateng: Thank you for all your efforts, Secretary-General.
The Chair: Thank you very much. Lord Stevenson, I am interested to hear your question.
Lord Stevenson of Balmacara: I am not quite sure how to bridge from where we are at to where I am trying to get to.
The Chair: It is not so much a segue as a new start.
Q9 Lord Stevenson of Balmacara: May I first say that we have all learned a lot this afternoon? Thank you very much for your contributions.
To reflect on that, if your proposition is, as I see it—and I am asking for your confirmation rather than anything else—that you are offering a service that is not available to the UK in any other way, of trying to facilitate how we improve our trade, between ourselves and to the wider world, providing growth and providing the opportunities that you have been talking about, I would have thought that your appearance would be welcomed wherever you went. But it does raise the question of where that ranks in your organisation in relation to the other things that you also have to do in terms of the Commonwealth, its history, its practice and everything else. Can we be reassured that trade will be a continuing and perhaps even an enhanced measure of your term as Secretary-General?
Shirley Botchwey: Trade, for me, is extremely important. It will continue to be so. This is because many of the countries need to catch up with development. We have a 1.5 billion population of young people under 29. For me, trade is the way to go, because these young people, many of whom are educated, have no jobs.
If we do not provide for them, we will see them continuously on those perilous journeys, trying to cross into more affluent countries in search of greener pastures. If we do not provide for them, we will find them supporting terrorist activities, because they need something to do. These are energetic young men. If we are able to drive trade, if we are able to drive entrepreneurship so that these young people can find work to do, if we are able to drive investment into the countries, jobs will be created.
We have quite a sizable middle class in many of these developing countries, with the potential to increase. For me, this is front, back and centre. This is the way we need to go. Even within building resilience in the area of climate change, there are jobs, there are opportunities for trade and investment. It is not only the trade pillar, but also linked to the pillar of building climate resilience.
If we look to the first pillar, which is building democratic resilience, it is what is needed so that companies will move into countries. If they know that it is predictable, that if they go into a country, they will be able to get justice if there is an issue, that the environment is friendly to investment, they will go. They are interlinked.
For me, trade is so important and we will continue to push. I have asked that the secretariat comes up with a portal, because I believe that every country has something to offer. We will put on that portal all the countries and what they are offering, so that at a glance, an investor will know what to expect.
In all that, we need to make sure that we prepare the countries and help them, so that they are prepared, including on critical minerals. Many of our countries, especially the African countries, are endowed with a lot of rare earths and a lot of minerals. If you go into the countries, some of the agreements that have been signed are very bad, so the countries and the communities are not getting anything out of these agreements. Preparing the countries, helping them, building their capacity and giving them technical assistance is also extremely important. That is where we come in.
We are working with CWEIC. We are working to ensure that the Commonwealth Investment Network in its second phase is getting ready with the Sustainable Markets Initiative, SMI, to make sure that they take advantage.
The problem, or the issue, is that many of these private sector companies see a lot of risk. This, for me, is frustrating. How is it the case that a country like China does not see risk? It goes in there. It is in there. It is making money. That is why it is in all the countries, even the Pacific countries. Why is it that the countries that I believe should be in many of our member states are not there and are not encouraging their businesses to be there? There is a lot to be made. It has to be a win-win, but we are not seeing it. That, for me, is the problem and the main issue—the risk that they see instead of seeing the business opportunities.
The Chair: They are well made points. We are coming to our last question. Baroness Lawlor will join us online.
Q10 Baroness Lawlor: Thank you, Secretary-General. It is most interesting. I want to pick up on your last point, because it is important. We in Britain have strong links with the Commonwealth; we have ties, formal and informal. One of the points is how we develop trade, and you have made two significant, interrelated points. One is that countries need to be stable and democratic to attract entrepreneurship and businesses to develop there.
With which countries and with what sorts of businesses do you think a start could be made to get things going? Practically, if you wanted to advise and say, “Let us make a start. We can do something. We can encourage our people, but we want somewhere pretty safe to start with”? These things, as you said earlier, mushroom.
Shirley Botchwey: There are several African countries that are business-ready. There are several Caribbean countries that also have stable economies and stable environments in terms of making sure that institutions are stable and predictable, and institutions work. You cannot have a perfect democracy, but you can have a predictable environment where you know that, at least when there are issues, your investment will be safe.
I should give you the example of Ghana. Ghana is one such country. Togo is one such country. Nigeria, the southern African countries, eastern African countries, Rwanda, Kenya—there are so many of them. This is Africa. If you go to the Caribbean, the issue with the Caribbean is the small economies and small populations, but when you look at the stable environment, there is a lot to say in their favour as well. It is for the business person to study. We are available. A lot of research has been done at the Commonwealth Secretariat and we are very willing. That is why we work with the SMI, with CWEIC and with the Commonwealth Investment Network, and we can support in terms of giving a lot of information. I know that businesses have their own ways of collecting information.
I have said and I say again that there is no perfect system. However, if you look beyond the risk, I believe that there is a lot to be achieved to make sure that countries will not be exploited.
Baroness Lawlor: Would you envisage that services, which are the UK’s greatest export, including to the Commonwealth, could be traded reasonably fairly with goods from the Commonwealth?
Shirley Botchwey: They should be. From our statistics, services make up about how much?
Rajiv Babooram: They represent around 60%.
Shirley Botchwey: Yes, about 60%. So that is a good place to start and to deepen.
Q11 Lord Anderson of Swansea: Secretary-General, critics might point to a certain asymmetry between the aspirations of the secretariat and the resources you have to follow them through. Is this criticism fair? I accept, of course, that many of those who work on your behalf will be on contract and not actual members, but how many officers do you have, particularly on the trade side, given the vast potential that people expect of you?
Shirley Botchwey: For me, when I joined, I decided that I agreed with the sentiments of member states that we cannot be a jack of all trades, because we do not have the means to do everything. That went into our new strategic plan—to concentrate on a few areas where we know that we have the advantage and to do it well, because there was no way we could compete with, say, the UN. Even the UN has its own issues with funding.
I decided that we would pay a lot of attention to partnerships, and we are doing that at the moment. We are working in partnership with sister organisations such as the Commonwealth of Learning, the Commonwealth Foundation, and then the accredited organisations because, indeed, some accredited organisations have more funds than we do. So, we are working with them.
If it is on education, we are not best placed to go into education in our member countries but, if we work through the Commonwealth of Learning, we will be able to achieve a lot more. We have set up an endowment fund, raising $200 million, for instance, from the private sector, from foundations, from philanthropists, and it is going quite well. This is what we are doing as a secretariat, but we will not disburse those funds. We will make sure that the Commonwealth of Learning is in the forefront, using those funds, because it has the expertise and will do it better than we will.
When it comes to health, we are working with accredited organisations. When it comes to strengthening institutions of governance, we are working with the Commonwealth Foundation, which has a lot of civil society organisations. We now have strong links with the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association, the CPA, to ensure that we work closely. For me, this is the way to go, because our funding has dwindled considerably. We cannot continue the way we would want to, but we have found a way out.
The Chair: Thank you very much. Any last comments from anyone? Secretary-General, thank you so much for coming and speaking to us today. It has been an enormous privilege for us to hear from you, particularly since, as Lord Boateng said, you are the first Secretary-General to come and engage with us.
I do not like to speak on behalf of my colleagues, but I feel there is a consensus in this room that the Commonwealth is extremely important as an entity. It is also important for the future of this country. It sounds like the UK could do quite a bit more to support you and your ambitions, to engage more with you as an organisation and your member countries, to enrich our citizens through better trade.
I have one question, and maybe one of your colleagues would answer this. A statistic was referred to in one of the questions about the value of intra-Commonwealth trade. I do not know if I missed that, but is trade between Commonwealth countries meaningfully more profitable than trade externally?
Shirley Botchwey: It is 21%—
The Chair: That is an amazing statistic.
Shirley Botchwey: —because of the institutional similarities, languages, legal systems, and all that.
The Chair: That is a valuable number to hold on to.
Shirley Botchwey: Yes, it is, correct.
The Chair: We wish you the greatest success.
Shirley Botchwey: Yet UK trade is about 2% with the rest of the Commonwealth, and it is concentrated in a few countries, about four or five countries only, and yet with—
The Chair: Sorry, Secretary-General, what was the number for that?
Rajiv Babooram: It is less than 10%.
The Chair: Less than 10%? That is very frustrating.
Shirley Botchwey: Yes, and compared to Europe, where it is 41%.
The Chair: Yes, of course. Baroness Bonham-Carter, did you have a final point?
Q12 Baroness Bonham-Carter of Yarnbury: A quick one, yes. When you say, “Across Commonwealth countries”, do you mean right across the Commonwealth, or is it more among African countries, as you were saying earlier?
Shirley Botchwey: The 21% is across Commonwealth countries, yes.
Baroness Lawlor: That includes those wicked large ones, too?
Shirley Botchwey: Yes. Unfortunately, the concentration of UK-Commonwealth export and import is with about five countries—Canada, Australia, India, South Africa and Singapore. All the rest are left—
The Chair: We will come to the end now, Baroness Lawlor. Do you have a final comment to make, though?
Baroness Lawlor: Yes. Generally, would it be neighbouring countries trading with each other?
The Chair: Lord Boateng, do you want to summarise that?
Lord Boateng: You could give as examples the increased trade between Ghana and Barbados, the relationships that are now developing, particularly between west African countries and Barbados, which are not adjacent, and indeed the relationship between India and a number of African countries. These are not countries next to each other, but they are countries that share a common link, through the Commonwealth.
Shirley Botchwey: Yes.
The Chair: That was very well put. I am glad that we ended on an optimistic note, with some rolling thunder outside. I am sorry that the wonderful weather has come to an end, as is always the case. Thank you so much, Secretary-General. Thank you for bringing your colleagues with you. We would love to continue to engage with you. If you have any follow-up comments, particularly in light of some of the statistics that we have just mentioned, we would be very grateful if you could send them in to us to include in our report. We will be very keen to hear the outcomes of the CHOGM summit in November and we wish you the greatest success in promoting your agenda. Thank you very much indeed.
