| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
7.39 pm
Lord Dykes: My Lords, I am sure that the whole House is extremely grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Radice, for launching this debate, which those who do not know the amazing story of BACEE might find esoteric; they would not be quite sure what actually happened. I also thank my noble friend, Lord Roper for his account of the earlier years. It is a great story of British achievement and also the achievement of those who attended the seminars and meetings of what might be described as an international roving Chatham House, an entity that was here, there and everywhere. Other countries have similar organisations of all kinds, but the focus on eastern Europe of this organisation and its predecessor was really of crucial importance.
One of the great things, to which my noble friend, Lord Ropers, alluded, was the lack of condescension in the approach that BACEE made to people. One can imagine the sensitivity needed in those approaches, particularly in the grimmer days of the Cold War, when contacts were much more limited. The turbulent history of eastern Europe was a complicated matrix, which people needed to absorb to work for BACEE, as volunteers and members of staff, in order to avoid the intense irritation that the recipients of their words of advice would feel if it was handled in the wrong way. In fact, it was handled with great sensitivity.
We remember the old Foreign Office enthusiasm for BACEE in the old days—and we come on to that theme now. We need to hear from the Minister about what has happened, and so on, and just to remind us again about what I think is a sad story. I speak only personally, although I also represent these Benches, but I think that there was an argument for keeping BACEE going, even after the huge changes in the political economy of the principal countries.
The only one of these countries that, sadly, I know at all well—and this is a terrible confession on my part—is Moldova, which is just about the smallest of them. Moldova would not resent people saying in the
17 Jun 2008 : Column 989
A lot of good was done. Various reports were issued over the period and many references were made to the successes with those countries. Of course, BACEE was even more important in the sense that too many members of the public in western European countries, because of how the press writes its stories, thought that everything was much more wonderful in our countries than in the single-party state, Communist countries. On the other hand, the propaganda in the single-party state, Communist countries said that everything was much worse in Dickensian terms for people living in western European democracies. The Soviet Union used to focus on lots of stories about Dickensian England in the 1950s and 1960s. There were many such examples; people forgot about the obvious complications of all those sophisticated eastern European societies, some of which had been flourishing democracies or putative quasi-democracies before the Second World War, but did not have a chance to complete that process.
Obviously, BACEE’s was a small effort in terms of the amount of political and other activity put in to change the nature of those countries, but 5,000 people is not a bad tally, as the noble Lord, Lord Roper, suggested. It must have had some considerable effect, as people saw the huge changes coming from the fall of the Wall, which was very abrupt—and thank goodness it was done in peaceful conditions. We should pay tribute sometimes to these things—for example, when we recall how the Red Army in East Germany recognised the reality of those fundamental changes, when it would have been so easy for senior military personnel in that army to make a different decision, fatally different and terribly tragic, to try to keep the status quo going. They knew what was happening because of how people voted with their feet and the Trabants poured into Czechoslovakia and elsewhere. It has now since become fashionable to have a convertible Trabant in eastern Germany; it is regarded as a very glamorous car. Things change in all societies.
The efforts that were made then and the way in which people reacted to them presaged very substantial changes. Those countries could easily have had their own alliances locally or regionally or become democracies of one kind or another more gradually; but they did not, and we now see the amazing difference. One might sum up the history of BACEE, and the observations of its members and staff over the years, as the three
17 Jun 2008 : Column 990
The final story must be the gradual approach and culmination of becoming EU members for quite a few of those countries—eight of them, originally, and then Bulgaria and Romania following and making it 10. It is an amazing story of an achievement. Bumpy rides are still to come, which is why an organisation such as BACEE should still exist—but, sadly, it does not. Other countries will be joining the European Union. Heaven forfend that I mention the subject of tomorrow’s debate—the Third Reading of the European Union (Amendment) Bill—but if the Lisbon treaty somehow revives in due course, with the consent of the Irish people and in whatever form, with adjustments, that, too, will help those new countries. Their enthusiasm for the institutional arrangements to ensure that the community of 27 countries worked properly has been very marked, often much more so than that of the long-standing member states. There was a common feeling about the necessity of all those things.
In August 2005, BACEE was closed down, under the then Foreign Secretary. The outstanding Foreign Secretary now, David Miliband, might have made a different decision, but you never know. In those days, in the summer of 2005, the morale in the Foreign Office was very low, with the various budget cuts scything through the building and the embassies. Personally, I think that it was overdone, but Governments will always say that they have to make cuts in the modern world. Far too many missions have been closed down. In the mean time, the Minister, who is widely respected for many different reasons and not only because of his UN past, can give us an explanation and perhaps also try to defend that closure, because I personally regret it and feel that it was a mistake.
7.48 pm
Baroness Rawlings: My Lords, I thank the noble Lord, Lord Radice, for starting this important debate and for chairing BACEE so well for the last 10 years. It is right and proper to call for the Government’s assessment of the work of the British Association for Central and Eastern Europe. I declare an interest at this stage, having been a member since 1994, when it was chaired enthusiastically by my late noble friend Lord Kelvedon. Yet I cannot help but think that, had a more thorough assessment taken place before it was closed, we might not be depending solely on hindsight to appreciate its work. It is a platitude that in many parts of life we do not know what we have until it has gone, but I know, and noble Lords will agree, that that is not how Governments should operate.
17 Jun 2008 : Column 991
It was particularly interesting to hear BACEE’s history from the noble Lord, Lord Roper. The budget of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office was supposed to be bolstered by efficiencies arising from restructuring, cutting administrative costs and changing the emphasis of resources. Instead, it seems to have atrophied. It has been mentioned before in this Chamber that, since May 1997, the Government have closed eight British embassies, eight high commissions and 18 British consulates, making a total of 34 closures in 10 years. This was intended to create a diplomatic surge, with diplomats reassigned to Middle Eastern posts, but it has dampened morale and led many to leave the service. While unfortunate, however, that is not the primary subject of our debate today. Any department or company faced with similar cuts might expect some of these effects, although I would argue that, if they were better managed, they would not have been so pronounced.
I mention all this because I think that it reveals a trend that finds its most glaring example in the closure of BACEE. Instead of pruning administrative inefficiencies, the FCO seems to have gone for some of the things that are doing substantial amounts of good for relatively minor amounts of money. BACEE cost the Foreign Office about £260,000. Now we shall have to rely perhaps more and more on the British Council and all its good work. I am pleased to see the noble Lord, Lord Kinnock, in his place for the debate.
Perhaps in a new bureaucratic age of governance, a perverse cost-benefit analysis would not give BACEE good marks, but I find that hard to believe. Since 1991, more than 5,000 politicians, civil servants, judges, journalists and businessmen from countries in central and eastern Europe have participated in BACEE’s courses, seminars and conferences, as we heard from the noble Lord, Lord Radice. It was undeniably popular. Many of the leaders in power today had experiences with BACEE. They remain still grateful and good friends. The evidence for this, and perhaps even the cause of this popularity, was the long-standing approach of responding to requests for help instead of imposing an unwelcome paternalism.
BACEE’s efforts were directed at improving civil society. Out of the ashes of authoritarian rule, many central and eastern European countries continue to struggle to transform into participative democracies. These are states in transition and this period of transition could not be a more important one. It is not enough to throw off the yoke of one-party rule. Education and assistance in young democracies strengthen the fabric of civil society and provide the foundation for its long-term success.
Or does the Minister think that the battle has been won? Is he satisfied that BACEE’s aims of promoting democracy, human rights and the rule of law have been achieved in central and eastern Europe? I suspect that it would be hard to persuade your Lordships’ House that there is no longer a pressing need for democracy, human rights and the rule of law in this part of Europe. Indeed, BACEE organised visits for Croatian and Kosovan delegations right up to its final week. Croatian membership of the EU is pending. Kosovo remains an issue of serious importance on the
17 Jun 2008 : Column 992
What must be mentioned is the kind of help that BACEE provided under the brilliant guidance of the former ambassador, Nicholas Jarrold, whom the noble Lord, Lord Radice, mentioned, his staff and all the distinguished members. The work of BACEE was project-based. It was resolutely not for profit. What it did, however, was to foster dialogue. This seems to me one of the most important ways of assisting countries eager to establish themselves on a firmer democratic footing and to empower their citizenry.
We believe in the importance of the European Union and enlargement of the European Union, especially in this part of the world, including Albania, Macedonia, Montenegro and others. We also believe that the EU should function properly, without too much red tape or centralisation. BACEE was exactly one of the right bodies helping to do this. Perhaps it will take hindsight for the Minister to appreciate the work of BACEE and the work that is still to be done. I hope that the contacts and good will that it worked hard to establish will continue in some form. Thus, I hope that the Minister will include in his assessment his thoughts on how progress will be made in BACEE’s absence. Perhaps then he will understand what has been lost.
7.55 pm
The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Lord Malloch-Brown): My Lords, I join other noble Lords in congratulating my noble friend Lord Radice on introducing the debate. As we have heard, this is an issue in which he and others have a long-standing interest. I am honoured to have the opportunity to reply to him.
Of the many important things that I learnt tonight, the least consequential was that my colleagues in the Foreign Office misled me about the pronunciation of BACEE. I was told it was said like Bassey in Shirley Bassey. I now realise that one consequence of Foreign Office cuts is that clearly it does not follow the American entertainment scene closely enough—it meant Count Basie. More seriously, and with great humility, I concur with all noble Lords who have spoken that the British Association for Central and Eastern Europe has clearly done extraordinary work during the past 40 years.
Tonight, as much as anything, it is important that we note that work, honour it and recognise that the terms of the association’s closure are something that few government programmes anywhere, sadly, meet, which is that it has achieved redundancy through the success of its mission. It has been closed not only because others can now take on the task that is left but principally because the core of the task has been fulfilled. These countries, barren of civil society and democratic tradition when the association began its work 40 years ago, are now, for the most part, thriving, prosperous and democratic members of the European Union. The Foreign Secretary recognised this when he wrote recently to my noble friend Lord Radice. He thanked all who had worked for BACEE for their dedication and highlighted the invaluable contribution
17 Jun 2008 : Column 993
My noble friend Lord Radice, the noble Lord, Lord Roper, and the noble Baroness, Lady Rawlings, laid out at considerable length the many successes of the British Association for Central and Eastern Europe since its birth in 1967. It was born when relations were difficult between us and countries in eastern Europe, when traditional diplomacy was constrained by the stand-offs of the Cold War and the Iron Curtain and when we had to find unconventional means to reach into those societies to build friendships and to open eyes to liberty and freedom. Against the backdrop of the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia, the association during those dark and difficult years kept links and was able to work in countries where government organisations such as the Foreign Office found it difficult to operate.
BACEE worked hard in that period to promote a closer understanding between the British people and the countries of central and eastern Europe. It pursued its aim of promoting democracy, human rights and the rule of law in Europe through conferences, seminars, round tables and study visits in the UK and abroad. We face a very different context because of dramatic changes during the short life of the organisation. The Berlin Wall has fallen, the Soviet Union has collapsed and many countries have emerged that are keen to join the European Union or that have closer ties with the EU than they did before. Throughout the political turbulence, BACEE focused its efforts on building democratic institutions and market economies, freedom of expression, the effective administration of justice and respect for human rights. It added to its study tours and worked in new countries, focusing on Ukraine, Belarus and others where it did not initially work. Nevertheless, in many regards, much of that mission has been accomplished.
In particular, since 1991, as has been mentioned, 5,500 people from those countries have participated in BACEE programmes. These include more than 60 former or current Ministers, four heads of government and 10 Foreign Ministers. BACEE’s founders, whom we have honoured tonight, never faltered in their belief that both halves of a then divided Europe shared a common destiny. They have been proved right: 10 of the central and eastern European countries where they worked are now members of the European Union; Croatia, Macedonia and Turkey have candidate status; and others are keen to join the EU in time. We remain committed to promoting the enlargement of the European Union, as we see enlargement as one of the most successful policy tools of achieving democracy, market reform and the rule of law. All of us who watched the efforts of candidate countries to adjust to meet the test of addressing their democracy deficits—corruption, lack of rule of law and issues of market liberalisation—know that the lever of membership of the Union in its own ways built on the BACEE concept and moved that agenda dramatically forward.
In a letter to the Foreign Affairs Committee in September 2005, Douglas Alexander, then a junior Minister in the Foreign Office, recognised the work
17 Jun 2008 : Column 994
While the noble Lord, Lord Dykes, was brave enough to mention the Lisbon treaty and the European Union, let me make a debating point. The European Union spends £3 billion a year on the same group of countries to support their efforts to prepare for membership, in the promotion of democracy and the rule of law and the building of market economies. The good Count’s work, by which I mean BACEE, remains very much a subject of priority attention here and in the European Union as a whole.
I am delighted that BACEE does not end here tonight or that it ended when it closed its doors as an active organisation. The association has decided to perpetuate its name and its valuable work through an annual lecture on a theme related to that work. My noble friend said that he hoped that the first lecture would be this autumn, under the auspices of the School of Slavonic and East European Studies, in a fine room in the Foreign Office. Like him, I was glad to hear that things other than wine came in fine forms. We hope that the Foreign Secretary will be able to give that first lecture, but my noble friend informed me of this hope only this afternoon and I have not had an opportunity to confirm whether the Foreign Secretary will be able to take up that invitation.
In closing, I add my thanks and congratulations to the thanks and praise that have been advanced in this debate for all who were directors of BACEE, those who were members of its board and those who chaired it during the past 40 years. If ever there has been an historic achievement that has changed the direction of our world in the past 40 years, it is the securing of freedom for the countries of the former Soviet Union. BACEE has played an honoured and honourable role, which history will remember proudly, in the liberation of that region.
Lord Davies of Oldham: My Lords, I beg to move that the House do now adjourn during pleasure until 8.20 pm.
Moved accordingly, and, on Question, Motion agreed to.
[The Sitting was suspended from 8.05 to 8.20 pm.]
Pensions Bill
Baroness Hollis of Heigham moved Amendment No. 38:
17 Jun 2008 : Column 995
Where a jobholder elects to make pension contributions on that proportion of earnings which are £5,035 or less, the employer shall contribute in the same proportion as for earnings above £5,035.”
The noble Baroness said: The amendment standing in my name and that of my noble friend Lady Dean is a probing amendment. I am confident that it is virtuous; I am equally confident that it is technically deficient, but as it is probing, the second problem may matter less than the first.
This amendment is about the £5,000 range of earnings that is not taken into account in personal accounts, which have been mentioned several times today. They will raise 8 per cent— that is, 4 per cent from the employee, 3 per cent from the employer and 1 per cent from tax relief—on all earnings, broadly speaking, within the income bands of the lower earnings limit—LEL—at just over £5,000, and an upper earnings limit, which was originally judged to be aligned with UEL, although that has now become more complicated.
That has the advantage of aligning personal accounts with basic state pension, unlike the standard defined contribution schemes—money purchase schemes—that, as far as I am aware, cover all earnings from the first pound onwards, although they may cap in some cases at the top. We can understand why that de minimis of the LEL was introduced for personal accounts because the main beneficiaries are likely to be low-paid, part-time women often in several microjobs. It did not make sense for them to contribute to a personal account while being disqualified from access to a basic state pension, which would then have meant that their BSP was incomplete, and they could have lost their personal account pound for pound under some scenarios.
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |