Oral evidence: Global Britain and South America, HC 1617
Tuesday 23 July 2019
Ordered by the House of Commons to be published on 23 July 2019.
Members present: Tom Tugendhat (Chair); Chris Bryant; Stephen Gethins; Andrew Rosindell; Mr Bob Seely; Royston Smith; Catherine West.
Questions 237-264
Witnesses
I: Nigel Baker, Head of Latin America Department, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, and Menna Rawlings, Director General, Global and Economic Issues, FCO.
Written evidence from witnesses:
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Witnesses: Nigel Baker and Menna Rawlings.
Q237 Chair: Welcome to this afternoon’s session of the Foreign Affairs Committee. Thank you both very much for coming. Can I ask you to briefly introduce yourselves?
Menna Rawlings: I am Menna Rawlings, DG for economic and global issues at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office.
Nigel Baker: My name is Nigel Baker. I am deputy director for the Americas and head of the Latin America department.
Q238 Chair: Thank you very much. Very quickly, where does South America rank on the Foreign Office’s list of priority regions?
Menna Rawlings: Shall I have first go at that, Nigel? By the way, just to introduce myself to the Committee, this is my first appearance at the Foreign Affairs Committee. I have only been in the job three or four months, so I have Nigel with me, who is a true expert on the region and will be able to step in as necessary.
In terms of where South America ranks in our overall priorities, it is certainly a region that we have invested in significantly over the past nine years since the Canning agenda launched, in 2010. I think you can see a genuine uptick since then in our investment in and attention to this part of the world in terms of the number of staff in the region, the investment in language skills, the expansion of our presence—in particular, on investment and trade—and the work we are doing through different programme funds; we are spending hundreds of millions of pounds now in that region. You can see that we have been stepping up over that period, and indeed we have some more recent resource with the Global Britain network uplift.
In terms of relative ranking, it is a really interesting question. We tend to focus a lot on other regions of the world, including the Indo-Pacific for example, where there are huge opportunities and also threats. South America has not necessarily been seen as so much in the British sphere of influence as some other parts of the world, but we certainly see a lot of opportunities there over the coming years, as well as some continuing threats on security, governance and the rule of law.
Q239 Chair: Last year, you announced 12 new posts in the network, none of which was in South America. Do you think the resourcing is adequate?
Menna Rawlings: We have had some new posts in South America.
Nigel Baker: There was the embassies uplift.
Menna Rawlings: We have had new consulates general in two cities in Brazil.
Nigel Baker: This is since 2010, not last year. They are in Belo Horizonte and Recife, and of course we reopened our embassy in Paraguay, so we do have a presence in all the key countries in South America.
Menna Rawlings: But I think under the latest uplift, we have increased the number of staff in the region.
Q240 Chair: Do you think you are adequately resourced?
Menna Rawlings: Yes. I think for now, we are adequately resourced to pursue some of those opportunities that I talked about. There are questions about our presence in the world as we move through Brexit and beyond. We will probably have some ideas for resourcing in the next spending review, but for now, we genuinely believe that the effort and resources we have put in over the last nine years are having an impact and making a difference. In fact, I was in Peru recently for the Pacific Alliance summit and was talking to our team there, and I think they also welcome the additional resources that they have had, both in terms of people and programme money.
Q241 Royston Smith: Can I talk about trade? I am sort of going all over the place, because we acknowledge you are not the Minister, and therefore we might have to change our approach slightly.
We were out in South America recently, in Bogota in Colombia, where the embassy has something like 200 staff. However, our trade with Colombia is woeful really, compared with other countries that invest far less. I know it is not a straight, “We invest this much and we expect a certain return on it,” but there seems to be a mismatch between the amount of effort—resource—that we put in and the return we get from the point of view of trade, and even of support in the UN. What can we say realistically and reasonably—not to be political—about that?
Menna Rawlings: There is no doubt that we are not yet punching above our weight in South America when it comes to trade, although there are a lot of positive developments, particularly around inward investment, in countries like Brazil, where the figures are going up very fast. We have an excellent Her Majesty’s trade commissioner based in Sao Paolo, Jo Crellin, who is working with teams across the continent to really try to push forward.
What I would say is that these things are not going to change overnight. They take time. I know that DIT is working closely with some big companies already present in the region to try to enable them to step up and improve their presence and opportunities. One great example from Peru—I was just there—is the G2G contract negotiated between the British Government and the Peruvian Government around the building of facilities for the Pan American Games, which are taking place this month. That enabled a whole bunch of new British companies—Mace, Arup and others—who had never had a presence in Peru before to come into the region and take advantage of £100 million-worth of contracts. That is the sort of model we can look at, looking at our key strengths, working with companies and using Government relationships to ensure that companies can come confidently into a new market.
Because we have not punched up to or above our weight, that does create a lot of opportunity. That will take time to come through, but I think we are headed in the right direction.
Q242 Royston Smith: In Argentina, for example, we have a staff of 80. We have acknowledged that we are doing relatively well in Peru and Chile, but in Colombia we are doing relatively poorly, even though we have two or three times as many staff there. They are doing all sorts of things—spending aid money as well as trying to develop trade links—but that does not seem to be playing through in Colombia in particular. So examples about Brazil and Peru are helpful, but, to get specific, it does not seem to be working in Colombia.
Nigel Baker: In a way, as you have identified, Colombia is a special case, partly because our focus there, unlike in most of the rest of the region, has been very much on the security side. We have played a very important role in working with Colombia through the peace process, supporting Colombia on security and justice and those areas. That has been where, unusually for this region, a lot of the resource has gone in terms of the embassy in Bogota.
We will see a change of emphasis in Colombia—we are already seeing it, but will see more so. There is now the peace agreement, and there is still a lot of work to do to help Colombia to implement it, which we continue to support, but there will be more focus in the same direction as the rest of the region on the trade and prosperity side. I think we have seen that with some of the programme work—the prosperity fund work, for example—where there is a focus on poverty, but it is also about opening up markets, and there is a secondary trade element there.
On the very specific business of looking for contracts and supporting British companies, there will be an uptick happening now and from now on. In a way having an embassy of that size focusing on other things is probably rather a historical reflection of the relationship. I would expect in the next few years to see our priorities in Colombia shift more to the same direction as the rest of the region, with prosperity and trade at the top.
Q243 Royston Smith: It would be good for us and good for Colombia, but are you saying that the investment other countries are putting into Colombia is more focused on trade, whereas our focus is on trying to ensure that the peace process is successful, human rights and the rest and of it? If we do refocus, as you have just said, will that mean that we will take some of the focus or resource away from the peace process and other issues that are equally important?
Nigel Baker: I am not sure I look at it entirely in a binary way, but I think our relationship with Colombia—holding the pen at the United Nations and being a strong supporter of Colombia as a security ally in the region—has meant that that focus has been there.
One other thing to flag is that generally, as you might have seen in your visits to the region, it has taken some effort to get British companies—with some notable exceptions—to look at Latin America and the possibilities of Latin America. Spanish and Italian companies have maintained links and been less reticent about looking for opportunities in the market. That is true of Colombia particularly, because of its image of violence, insecurity and difficulties.
One of the top priorities of the trade commissioner, Jo Crellin, and her people—she has some people whose work is directed over here—is to get the message about the opportunities of Latin America to the companies and get them to come to look at the possibilities. Colombia is going to be part of that process. It is the third biggest market in South America and it is coming out of violence and conflict, hopefully. The possibilities for the country, and therefore for a trading partner like us, should be opening up.
Q244 Chris Bryant: Sticking with Colombia for a moment, it feels as if the Duque Administration has now become an Uribe Administration in all but name, which is not quite how Duque got elected. How does the British embassy feel about that?
Nigel Baker: I am not sure I would characterise it as an Uribe Government in all but name. We have been very clear at the United Nations—in fact we helped to lead a UN Security Council visit to Colombia about 10 days ago—where we see things not proceeding as we think they need to proceed in the process, particularly the speed of implementation, the reintegration of fighters and other aspects of the peace process. We have flagged that up to the Colombians.
Unlike Uribe, who has said several times that he doesn’t like the peace process and who voted against it when there was a referendum, Duque’s mandate when he was elected was, “I’m not going to go back on the peace process, but I want to see some changes to the agreement.” He proposed some amendments to Congress and Congress declined to accept them; he accepted that and eventually signed the agreement as submitted.
We will have to see the extent to which the Government really commit to the hard graft of building the peace, if the support for the rural integration and providing funds for the necessary bodies that need to be put in place the peace process is brought in. That is work in progress. We keep watching very carefully.
Q245 Chris Bryant: But it is work in very slow progress, isn’t it? It feels like dragging heels, especially when there are time limits set on how long there can be applications for baldio territory for campesinos or for indigenous peoples, and when, as you say, the reintegration of former FARC guerrillas is going very slowly and there is not enough protection for human rights defenders. It feels as if it is going back to a state from before the agreement. There has been no further work with the FMLN and, for that matter, it is all destabilised by people coming in from Venezuela. It doesn’t feel like things are going in the right direction.
Nigel Baker: Security remains a lot better than it was five years ago in Colombia. There is forward progress. Just the other day, the Colombian Government asked for the UN verification mission to be renewed for a further year. We have seen from our embassy visits, the camps, the reintegration and work in the field and that things are happening on the ground. They see work for integration. It is interesting that 100 of about 200 of the FARC candidates for the October local elections are former combatants, so they remain really committed.
We have to keep focused on what is happening, which is why we led the Security Council visit the other day. We certainly cannot take our eye off the ball. It is going to be a long process—after 50 years of war, peace is not going to be secured in a couple of years. But certainly our embassy’s job is to keep very close to the Colombian Government and to what is happening in the countryside.
Q246 Chris Bryant: Are there any British armed forces in Colombia?
Nigel Baker: Not to my knowledge, apart from the defence attaché.
Menna Rawlings: Can I add that we had President Duque here in London in June?
Chair: We met him.
Menna Rawlings: The messages were given about concern about the pace of implementation of the peace process. Points about human rights defenders were made by the Foreign Secretary and the Prime Minister. To echo Nigel’s point, I do not think that makes us complacent, but we feel that things are slowly moving in the right direction. The conclusion of the Security Council visit in general was quite closely aligned with that.
I completely agree that we need to maintain the pressure and keep driving that through to ensure progress is maintained.
Q247 Stephen Gethins: I want to ask about the relationship with Argentina and with its neighbours. I want you to set out the FCO’s strategy for supporting Argentina through its current political and economic reforms.
Nigel Baker: Putting it through its reforms, or a strategy towards Argentina generally?
Stephen Gethins: A strategy for supporting Argentina through these reforms at the moment, please.
Nigel Baker: President Macri has been in place since the end of 2015. Elections are coming up this autumn, as you know. We identified an opportunity with the Macri Government from the very beginning. He wanted to put the economy back on a stable basis, open up to international partners and work with partners such as the UK on a range of areas, from anti-corruption measures, which are one of his priorities, to securing more investment, science and innovation research and so on—bringing Argentina back into the world.
Through our embassy, we have been very much working with the Government on that. We have quite a lot of projects working with the anti-corruption office in Buenos Aires. We have supported trade delegations—there is a new trade envoy to Argentina. We have supported Macri’s efforts in economic reform, including supporting the IMF’s arrangement with Argentina worth $57 billion—the largest arrangement it has—to help to restabilise the economy after the previous years.
That has also helped in terms of our work with the Falkland Islands, which I can touch on further if you want. We have also supported the application to join the OECD, because we recognise that, for a country to submit itself voluntarily to the constraints and requirements of OECD membership is in itself a way of stabilising the economy, particularly in a country such as Argentina where politics has not mixed well with economics over the last decade.
Chris Bryant: To put it mildly.
Nigel Baker: That has been our role and position, and our embassy has been very active in that support. We have done what we can to support that process. Some of the results have been a bit disappointing; Macri himself would say that, which is why the election in the autumn remains too close to call. However, we certainly see what he has been trying to do as something that is in line with what the UK would like.
Q248 Stephen Gethins: Are there are any areas in particular that you are focusing on in terms of anti-corruption efforts, or any areas you think you should be focused on given the disappointment with where things are at the moment?
Nigel Baker: Anti-corruption has been an area that we have been working on; it is one of his priorities too. We have signed two memorandums of understanding, back in 2016 and also more recently, both on the security side and around corruption and infrastructure, which provide the framework for some of the project work their embassy has been doing. The work around the OECD and the technical support for the economic stabilisation were a bit of a focus right through the G20 that Argentina was hosting last year. The Falklands, clearly, has taken up a lot of the bilateral work as well, but that has been very much in a positive frame rather than the rather negative frame of previous years.
Q249 Stephen Gethins: So very much with the anti-corruption efforts focused on—sorry, can you just outline again for me where you think the particular focus should be for the UK? Also, I know you have said that a lot more work needs to be done, but where in general do you think the areas are, in terms of anti-corruption but also the rule of law?
Nigel Baker: Argentina has just launched—in April, I think—its new national anti-corruption plan. That is a plan for over the next four years; in fact, it very much drew inspiration from the UK’s own anti-corruption strategy and flowed from a lot of the conversations and discussions that we had. The UK’s anti-corruption unit helped to advise the Argentine anti-corruption office on that work.
The other area of work was very much through the G20—beneficial ownership transparency and those sorts of areas—and also best practice in a range of areas, such as a number of programmes on open government, access to information, anti-bribery, economic crime and money laundering. Some of it is relatively small scale, but the anti-corruption office is run by very capable people and has the ear of the President, so as with getting their anti-corruption plan through the Argentine Congress, they are having an impact on the Argentine political and economic scene in terms of putting these measures in place.
[Stephen Gethins took the Chair.]
Q250 Chair: Thank you. Sorry, Tom Tugendhat has just had to nip off to present a petition, thus the sort of musical chairs that you are seeing at the moment.
Just as a final question, I wonder if you could give us your assessment of the first seven months of President Bolsonaro’s time in office: what you are making of that, how that has changed the relationship, and how that has changed your interaction with the Administration as well.
Nigel Baker: President Bolsonaro is a very different Brazilian leader from leaders we have had in the past. I think there are, in the timeworn phrase, challenges and opportunities in what Bolsonaro offers. On the positive side, there are a couple of things that he wants to do that we have not really seen from Brazilian Governments for some while, one of which is very much to open up the Brazilian economy.
Brazil, despite being one of largest—in the top 10—economies in the world, is down at about 30 in terms of economies that are open to global trade. Through Mercosur, but also through their own rules and regulations, they have very complex barriers to free-flowing trade. Bolsonaro has said that he wants to open up; that is an opportunity, and we will see what the possibilities are that we can explore. The first step we have seen is delivering the political will to secure an EU-Mercosur agreement, which has been 20 years in negotiation, and would not have happened under previous Governments.
Q251 Chair: Can you say a wee bit more about the deal that has been reached? Obviously, it was signed quite recently. What difference will that make for the UK’s relationship and the EU’s relationship, as well?
Nigel Baker: It has been signed between the EU and the four Mercosur countries. The UK is party to that. How it will apply to the UK exactly in the future will depend on our relationship with the EU, how we leave the EU and, therefore, what we can do with the deal. It represents a real breakthrough after 20 years of negotiation, with exciting possibilities for the UK.
I know that colleagues in DIT are looking at the Ts and the Is—the details. I think it is 3,000 or so pages of text. It will almost certainly be quite a long ratification process through all the EU countries, as well as the Mercosur countries. It does potentially open up a market that has been quite difficult of access and offers real possibilities for the UK—really quite exciting ones.
Menna Rawlings: Can I endorse that point? The EU-Mercosur agreement is a long-awaited breakthrough in terms of our collective efforts to ensure that key economies of South America open up and that we are able to maximise the opportunities. It was no mean feat to get it over the line. It is still a political agreement. As Nigel says, there is still work to do to get it put into force. It is very much something that we welcome.
The other trading bloc we have been working more closely with is the Pacific Alliance and the four countries that represent perhaps a more open and free trading type of environment with which we can engage. We retain observer status on that. We are not yet one of the countries seeking to apply for associate membership or a free trade agreement.
The DIT view, which we share, is that the medium-term prospect in that part of the world is more likely to be the CPTPP; none the less, we are staying close to the Pacific Alliance and want to keep building those sets of relationships with those countries, as well.
The last thing on Bolsonaro, because Nigel did not mention it, is the Paris agreement. We welcome the fact that Brazil has decided to stay in that agreement. Indeed, we look forward to working closely with all the countries in South America on the whole issue of climate change, deforestation and biodiversity. It is a really important part of the world for us within the context of the work we are doing on that issue.
Q252 Chair: Just before I pass on to Catherine, what happens with the Mercosur deal in terms of the UK leaving the European Union?
Menna Rawlings: A lot depends on the sequencing of events, if you like. As you know, where there are agreements already in place, we have been seeking to transfer those over. Indeed, in South America we have already done that successfully with two existing trade agreements, with the Andean Community and Chile. We are in a good place on that.
This is slightly more complicated because it is not actually an agreement in force yet. We will continue to support all efforts to push that through, and then we will have to consider it as part of a broader suite of trade agreements that we will want to take forward and conclude in years to come.
As the Committee knows, we have already said that we are putting a very high priority on trade agreements—new free trade agreements in future with Australia and New Zealand and, of course, the US. There are others that are very high up the list, in terms of where trade agreements already exist with the EU, such as Japan. We will need to look at that within the round of how we prioritise those, obviously, with a new Prime Minister and Cabinet at the helm.
Q253 Mr Seely: I have a couple of brief questions. One is on biodiversity—that is great and sounds good. Is there a danger that, when one talks to other parts of the world about biodiversity, we end up talking down to people? Do they not turn around and say, “Why don’t you get your own house in order first?”
Menna Rawlings: There is always a risk in terms of how we approach these issues with other countries around the world. I have to stress again that my experience of South America is relatively limited. I have not served there, and I do not want to base all my evidence on two days in Peru. However, conversations I had with people there—including those in the Government and the NGO sector—revealed that they are really exercised about these issues, and that they are keen to work with us to preserve as much of the amazing biodiversity in their own country as they can. Provided we do it in a spirit of partnership and co-operation, there are lots of opportunities in South America. We are also spending a lot of money on this—
Q254 Mr Seely: What does that partnership consist of, in practical terms?
Menna Rawlings: Through the BEIS-led international climate fund, we are already spending significant amounts of money, with the countries in the region focusing particularly on deforestation, particularly in countries like Brazil and Colombia. There is a question about whether we can extend that out. The fact that we are putting our money where our mouth is on this issue is important, and we are working to create conditions of success to protect the biodiversity of the future. This year COP25 will be in Chile, and that is an opportunity to build a sense of partnership and leadership around that with Chile and with other countries in the region. As for specifics on the programmes, Nigel, I don’t know whether you want to add anything.
Nigel Baker: Colombia is a good example: when President Duque was here a couple of weeks ago, we signed a sustainable partnership agreement. On your point about talking down, this comes from the Colombians who are saying, “We want the sort of expertise you can provide to partner us in this.” It is a mixture of stuff on the economic side, such as programmes around sustainable development, green finance, and deforestation—as Menna mentioned—and on the scientific side, which includes a spectacular link-up with Kew gardens for example. Colombia is very interested in scientific support. To add to that there is the political joint work looking into COP25 and COP26, Colombia being one of the leaders in the region, and working with Colombia with the region. There is a whole variety of different tools through that agreement.
Menna Rawlings: If you would like a bit more information on exactly what those programmes are doing and in which countries, we can definitely provide that.
Q255 Mr Seely: You made a passing reference to free trade agreements and so on, and then you said that CANZUK countries were high on the priority list. Are we striking individual deals with those countries, or are we looking at what the Australians and New Zealanders have in terms of their Tasman deals, and thus trying to extrapolate that out to other CANZUK states such as Canada and the United Kingdom? Rather than just reinventing the wheel, there is an argument that suggests we should take what the Aussies and New Zealanders have, which is the gold standard in terms of trade and movement, and then just apply it to us and any other countries that would like it, such as Canada.
Menna Rawlings: Happily, this is an area where I have some expertise as I was formerly High Commissioner to Australia, so perhaps I can answer that one. It is important first to say that we are not actually negotiating any free trade agreements yet; that will have to wait until we leave the EU. The prioritisation that exists is something that we will have to come back to under a new Prime Minister and Cabinet. As things stand, we are looking at those on a bilateral basis. The teams in Australia and New Zealand are certainly working closely together and sharing expertise on trade policy. Part of this is that in our earlier exploratory talks with both countries, they want to look at this bilaterally as well—that is part of the reason. The other reason is that under the terms of the existing agreement between Australia and New Zealand, there is free movement. There is the issue of whether or not we would want to apply that to an agreement with the UK. That is certainly something to debate further.
Q256 Catherine West: Just so that you are aware, the four of us who did the visit were very impressed by all the staff in Buenos Aires and in Bogotá. I don’t think it has come up yet, so I should mention the excellent work that Mark Kent is doing on laying out what happened 30 years ago and the Falklands issue in nearly every meeting before he starts. He has done all the background work to connect parents with the boys who were lost 30 years ago on the island, and all the rest of it. When you are there as non-experts, you can really tell just how much work has been done. I commend the work that Mark has done. Obviously we are waiting to see what happens in the autumn around the election, but it was a real pleasure to be there and see all that work.
We also saw some of the work on trafficked women. The UK has led on developing a toolkit for women judges who have been working for years on violence against women in Bogotá and around the city, and has been sharing the expertise we have in the UK on dealing with people trafficking, prostitution and women’s rights. It was really exciting to see the embassy promoting that.
This is the end of Dr Tibber’s period as our representative in Colombia. Where do you both think the work will go next? Obviously you have been very involved in the peace process for years. It feels as though there is a little bit of a crossroads because the Duque Administration was not as fully behind the peace process. It was good to see when we were there that the UK mission was very much pressing on the work of the Special Jurisdiction for Peace, which is one of the key tenets of the peace process. We were introduced to some of the key legal people there.
My question is really about the future for Colombia. We have an interest in trade, and we obviously have to keep an eye on that, but do you think that the UK, as the pen holder at the UN on the verification mission to Colombia, will be pushing to renew the mission’s mandate, or do you think that the focus and the priority will change? Do you have a feeling for that yet? I am very interested in your views, because obviously it is very difficult, even though it is well resourced compared with other countries. Do you feel that that work will continue? Do you feel that there will be a different priority from the Government here to say to the new person, “We are going to switch slightly”? What is your feeling?
Menna Rawlings: I will have a very brief go at that, but I will ask Nigel to comment. Has there been an announcement about the successor?
Nigel Baker: It has not been announced. It is known, but not formally announced, I think.
Menna Rawlings: I won’t say the name in that case.
Catherine West: That’s fine—it is more about what his or her priorities might be.
Menna Rawlings: Sure, I understand that—I was just checking.
Certainly my understanding, coming into this role, is that we are the pen holder—as you put it—at the Security Council, and that that is at Colombia’s request. As Nigel has set out, we were instrumental in organising the recent Security Council visit, which I think went well; within the bounds of the concerns that we talked about, it gave some reassurance to members that things are still moving in the right direction.
This is a personal view, I suppose, but I think the challenge reflects the earlier question about trade and investment: without neglecting or becoming complacent about the peace process, how can we start to make this a more rounded relationship in which we can encourage more British companies, for example, to engage and invest? If I were the next person going in, that would be my thinking at this stage of the process, because further prosperity will underwrite more security, which in its own way contributes to the success of the country.
That is where I would be taking it. What do you think, Nigel?
Nigel Baker: As I mentioned earlier, I do not necessarily look at it as a binary thing, where you have to do less in one area to do more in the other.
President Duque has a different focus from President Santos. He is very much focused on the economic side: the economic reintegration and economic development as a way of tackling some of the problems that have beset Colombia in the past, such as huge differentials in wealth. That is something that we want to work with Colombia on, and our prosperity fund work is very much in that area.
We also have our conflict, stability and security programme work, which will continue. It focuses on the hard nuts and bolts of the peace process: the renewal verification mission, which we will support for another year—it will be an annual thing, but we will certainly support it—the work of the human rights defenders, supporting communities in conflict areas and so on. I don’t think they have to cut across each other. Certainly, I have been in a number of meetings with our ambassador who is heading out there. He understands that Colombia is in a different place from when Peter Tibber began four or five years ago. There is more focus on trade, prosperity—the sort of things that are high on the Colombian Government’s agenda. He has been briefing himself in some detail on the peace process, Britain’s role in it and how to make sure that we play a leading role in that all-important implementation of the agreements that have been made.
Q257 Catherine West: Given that a lot of the trade will depend on a secure environment and a lot of the violence issues are in the regions, what more do you think the UK could do to support safety? That is a very big question. President Duque would like to have a new chapter, but when human rights defenders keep getting assassinated all the time, that rather undermines progress. What do you feel our role can be in terms of pushing on—in particular, there was a tragic loss this week of a woman, a human rights defender who had really pushed on land rights, indigenous groups and so on. What further role do you think the UK can play? That came up when we were in the regions—that sense of a lack of security. People who want to invest and do joint collaborations on business will want to know that it is a secure region, as well.
Nigel Baker: There are a couple of things. On human rights, the question of vulnerable community leaders and human rights defenders will continue to remain a particular priority for us. Part of our role is continuing to lobby and push and show the Colombian Government that we, with others in that community, remain entirely focused on that. But we won’t just leave it to telling them what to do, encouraging them on what to do. Also we will continue to keep in place a range of programmes supporting the strengthening of agencies to have human rights defenders programmes. That will continue from the embassy.
There is also work on the prosperity side. The prosperity programme is not going to places that are already wealthy and well-off. It is very much focusing on secondary areas, some of which have suffered from conflict. If Colombia is to move forward from 50 years of conflict, that development in areas where there hasn’t been much state presence or development in the past is crucial to the longer term, to that forward vision. It will be crucial if President Duque wishes to make a success of his programme. We will remain very focused on the human rights and peace process elements as we move forward on prosperity and trade.
Q258 Catherine West: Finally, one of the issues that came out was just how many displaced people there are in Colombia. It is the country with the largest number of displaced people, even more than Syria or Turkey or that region. What is your analysis of the border area, which we saw when we were there—we went to Valledupar, which is in the border area. There are very large migrations of people at the moment. That is very connected with the narcotics trade along that border area, then coming out towards the Pacific. As we heard from experts who are working through the embassy, they are, obviously, often then sold to the UK, Scotland and so on. Do you feel that the resource we have there is correctly focused on that task, which is understanding that mix between the movement of people and the very frightening criminal gangs as well?
Menna Rawlings: Just to understand, you are talking mainly about internally displaced persons or refugees, coming from Venezuela?
Q259 Catherine West: It is a new challenge for the regions, in an already very poor area. Obviously, some of these criminal gangs do not know borders, because they work through their own networks. We heard very compelling evidence from embassy staff but also experts with whom they work closely, who advise them. Do you think we have enough focus on that work? It has quite a direct link-in with UK communities around the drugs trade.
Menna Rawlings: I have a couple of points and will then let Nigel speak. In terms of Venezuela generally, we obviously are incredibly conscious of the displaced people who are coming out across the region and really presenting challenges to a range of countries. We are very focused on that in terms of humanitarian support, but also trying to address the root cause by helping to resolve the situation in Venezuela. We can talk about that a bit more if people would like us to.
Just on resources, we obviously have been working for a long time with the Colombian authorities on the narcotics issue and the drugs trade, and that work continues. It’s probably worth noting that the Chair of this Committee, Tom Tugendhat, has just written to Lynne Owens, asking about resourcing in Colombia and expressing some concerns about that. We are aware that the NCA are having to take some quite tough decisions about how they balance different pressures on them around the world. I think the answer to that will be really important in helping to answer your question as well, but we remain very seized, and the NCA remain very seized, of the importance of this issue and the risks that it represents not just to Colombia but to people and citizens here in the UK. Nigel, do you want to add anything on that?
Nigel Baker: Obviously, this requires a response in a range of areas. You have on the security side the NCA. Also, on the humanitarian side, I think it’s significant that the Department for International Development, which does not generally focus on Latin America, has put in place a package of about £15 million-worth of support for Venezuelans in Venezuela, for Venezuelans who are on the borders in different countries and for those countries that are hosting Venezuelans. Almost certainly, more will be required down the line. This is a massive problem. It is hugely destabilising to the region. I think we’re doing what we can at the moment. Colombia will almost certainly be looking also for broader international support to tackle this, because, as you say, it not only is destabilising internally but feeds the drug trafficking and human trafficking. There are incredibly vulnerable people along the border.
Q260 Chair: Could you say something about soft power? This was one thing that we were hearing about—Catherine was right to touch on this—on the visit that we had. We had excellent co-operation from your embassies in Bogotá and Buenos Aires, which were a fantastic help; I know they are fairly busy postings. Could you say a little about what plans you have to maximise the influence of UK soft power in the region, and touch on the role that educational institutions might have in that as well?
Menna Rawlings: South America is a really strong area of opportunity for us in the soft power space. Going back to my very first answer to the Chair, I think that has not always been as obvious, perhaps, as has been the case in some other parts of the world, mainly because of language and history. But certainly there is a huge amount already happening, and the sorts of programme funding that we are now able to bring into the picture to spend on things like the rule of law—promoting justice and good governance—are an incredibly important part of the UK soft power offer in that part of the world, which will make a difference. There is actually a great deal of openness to and appetite for that among many of the Governments themselves, who are obviously coming through a period of transition and really want to engage on this agenda.
That’s the headline. One specific thing to mention is Chevening scholarships. Again, this goes back to the first conversation: have we got the resourcing right? We are very proud, actually, of our record on Chevening scholars from South America coming into the UK. We have tripled numbers in recent years and, since 2015, we have increased by 152 the number of scholar places available per year. That is a really big step up. We have currently in the UK 207 scholars, of whom 53% are women. That is just one example—linked a bit to your question about education—of an area where we have massively stepped up. Nigel, do you want to talk about some others?
Nigel Baker: Yes—a couple of areas. Obviously, the British Council are well represented in the region. I think they are in every South American country, Latin South American country, bar three. That includes Venezuela. Despite everything, they are continuing to teach teachers and provide English classes, extraordinarily, in that really tough environment.
Our embassies have been working very closely with the Council programmes. You mentioned education. That is an area we definitely see as an area of comparative advantage for the United Kingdom. You have huge demand for English language, which means a huge demand for English language teachers, which generates enormous potential for students to come to British universities. The higher education sector and British universities are very active in roadshows and fairs and things like that, working commercially, across Latin American countries, but also working with the British Council around mutual qualifications, standards of teaching, et cetera. It is an important area of work.
Another area going up a notch in education is science and innovation. This is a really expanding area. The Newton Fund has had huge success which is bringing people together on research and innovation right across the region, in a country such as Peru, where it is a really big programme now, it is worth several million pounds.
Matched with a science and innovation network is the need to look at commercial possibilities and options. It means that the UK is becoming known in the region as a lead on creative industries and innovation. We have done a lot of work with the Pacific alliance. Menna mentioned work with the British Council separately. When President Duque of Colombia was here he was very focused—he visited the Francis Crick Institute, for example. He was very focused on possible link-ups on creative industries. There is a lot of interest in what the UK is doing. The development of education is certainly something that our embassies see as one of their priorities, and the broader sense of the British innovative brand—in the arts, science and educational scholarships.
Q261 Andrew Rosindell: I apologise for being so late to the session. To add to what you were saying, does the Westminster Foundation for Democracy have any role in the Latin America area? It seems to me there is a huge amount of potential for us to work with Governments and sister parties through the WFD. Is that an area we have worked on and developed?
On another point, is the BBC World Service also part of our soft power in Latin America. Is it being invested in and is it doing a job for us as well?
Menna Rawlings: These are great questions. I will defer to Nigel.
Nigel Baker: As Andrew knows, I was talking with the Westminster Foundation for Democracy just the other day about doing more in Latin America. Its particular focus at the moment has been in Venezuela, where they have been running a really good programme with the National Assembly. Unfortunately, on the whole, regime deputies have declined to take part, so it is mainly across the Opposition, but it is open to everybody. It is about parliamentary work between parties, but it is an all-party two or three-year programme.
On the back of that, the WFD has thought that perhaps it should be more involved in parts of Latin America, particularly when you look at some of the scandals round funding or corruption within Parliaments, issues around ethics, et cetera. I know it was looking at Ecuador. I see a definite role for the Westminster Foundation for Democracy. It is beginning to look at Latin America again, having been there in the past, but there has been a bit of a gap recently.
On the World Service, this is not an area of priority for some of the World Service programmes. BBC Mundo, which is a Spanish-speaking World Service, has quite a strong uptake. I cannot tell you which countries rather than other countries—
Menna Rawlings: I can. They have offices in Buenos Aires and Mexico, and reporters in Caracas, Bogota, Santiago, Quito and Lima. What I don’t have, though, are the figures, the listening numbers and the trajectory of that across the continent as a whole. We could provide that, if helpful. Sorry, Nigel, for interrupting.
Nigel Baker: That is fine. The embassies themselves are, on the whole, not directly involved in promoting BBC Mundo but they work with the offices that are there. The BBC certainly sees that Spanish-speaking BBC Mundo service as something that has got real potential, even if a lot of the young people coming over to the UK or who are interested in the UK want to plug into the English-speaking side of life.
Menna Rawlings: On sport, there is a huge amount going on. Obviously, we do not have cricket as such as soft power asset in this part of the world as we do elsewhere. Football is massive and the links between players from South America and the EPL. Again, we could get a bit more on that if it is of interest.
How that feeds through is quite interesting, into our reputation on sports infrastructure build. Before you came in, Andrew, we were talking about the Pan American Games in Lima and their G2G contract. Bringing that sort of reputation and expertise into countries like that, on the back of our reputation on sports excellence and infrastructure, is quite a powerful bit of our brand.
Q262 Andrew Rosindell: Do they allow the Falkland Islands to take part in those games? Or is there a political problem?
Nigel Baker: They do not take part in the Pan American Games.
Menna Rawlings: But they do take part in things such as the Small Island Games and, indeed, the Commonwealth Games.
Q263 Andrew Rosindell: That’s good. Just one other thing. We talk about South America but Latin America generally includes central America, too. Does your work cover central America as well in that sense, with similar issues such as language and so on? Do you include central America in your remit?
Menna Rawlings: Yes, we were driven a bit by your remit on this occasion, which is more South America, but we do treat it as Latin America, and tend to base our structures on regional arrangements on that, rather than exclusively the south. On this occasion, we did what we were asked, which was to focus on South America.
Q264 Chair: Thank you. On the point of sport, I can thoroughly recommend my constituent Billy Kay’s writing on the Scots who formed some of the football teams in South America. You’ll forgive me for chucking that in.
Were there any other questions from colleagues? No. I thank you both for coming along today and giving us your time in answering the wide range of questions. Thank you for coming, especially on a hot day when there may be other things going on in this building.
Menna Rawlings: Thank you for your interest and support; we really value it.
Chair: We have appreciated your work and that of your colleagues.