Despite the impressive performance of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office in representing the UK's interests across the globe with what is, in Governmental terms, a particularly small budget, the Foreign Affairs Committee believes that the FCO is under-funded. This situation has been exacerbated by the Spending Review 2010 and the lack of detail provided by the FCO and the BBC World Service as to exactly how the spending reductions target will be met is disappointing. There are concerns about the steps taken by the FCO to adjust to its reduced budget: reductions in the deployment of UK-based staff overseas and the optimistic planned programme of property sales will have a detrimental impact on the ability of the UK to protect its interests overseas. The establishment of the European External Action Service (EEAS) will place a further strain on the FCO's resources. The Committee welcomes the appointment of Lord Williams of Baglan to the post of "International Trustee" with responsibility for the BBC World Service, but reiterates its belief that a formal concordat governing the World Service's budget and output should be drawn up setting out the World Service's independence from budgetary pressures elsewhere in the BBC. The budget cuts faced by the British Council will lead to the Council becoming a substantially different organisation by the end of the Spending Review period. The greater emphasis that the British Council will place on commercial activity risks a diminution of the UK's influence and soft power.

While DFID's total budget is increasing, the Department will both restrict operating costs to 2% by 2014-15 and reduce its administrative costs by a third in real terms, from £128 million in 2010-11 to £94 million by 2014-15. This report warns that capping operational costs and staff numbers may not reduce overall costs or improve effective delivery of development assistance. The International Development Committee also raises concerns that cost pressures are driving DFID to use consultants to deliver its programmes, rather than in-house expertise. The Department spends £450 million on technical cooperation per year. Much of this is good work, yet it was unclear exactly what this money was spent on, or how effective it was and the extent to which external providers were used. DFID needs to improve its assessment of which projects and services it should use consultants for; and assess more carefully the use of consultants to manage the Department's own delivery programmes. In its efforts to reduce administrative spending DFID might be 'exporting' these costs to other organisations, including NGOs and multilateral aid organisations, with higher real administration costs. The Department should assess the best and most effective way to deliver development assistance as it may be able to do it more cheaply and effectively than external organisations. The report recommends that the Department improves its tracking of and reporting on the total cost of administering its aid programme with the aim of quantifying how much aid actually ends up reaching recipients.

The Foreign Affairs Committee publishes a wide-ranging report on the work of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) and two of its sponsored bodies, the BBC World Service and the British Council. It makes key recommendations on language skills for top diplomats, BBC World service funding and priorities, and funding for the British Council. For the FCO, the exclusion of foreign language skills and reliance purely on general management competencies creates the risk of credibility in respect of key diplomatic postings. The Committee finds it unacceptable that the World Service will not know its budget, priorities or objectives before the transition to licence fee funding and the new arrangements for oversight by the BBC Trust from April 2014. The British Council will struggle to deliver the UK's foreign policy objectives if cuts to grant funding from the FCO continue at a similar rate. The Committee recommends that the FCO should shield the British Council from the effect of any further cuts to the FCO budget in 2015-16.

About two-thirds of DFID's expenditure in 2011-12, including nearly 40% of its bilateral spending, went through multilateral organisations even though they have higher administrative costs. This represents a major change in recent years and has been accompanied by a decline in direct aid to recipient Governments. DFID argues that the change is not a reflection of its need to spend money quickly, but a result of the reduced need for budget support in countries with rising tax bases and improved financial management, as well as its focus on fragile states. The DFID needs to ensure that it has thoroughly examined other options such as greater use of local NGOs and sector budget support. DFID has switched expenditure from low income to middle income countries, in part because several countries with a large number of poor people have recently graduated to middle-income status. Policy towards middle income countries varies and DFID needs establish and make public the criteria it will use to inform decisions of when and how it should cease to provide aid. DFID should also consider establishing a Development Bank - that could offer concessional loans alongside grant aid and would free from the constraint of having to ensure that cash was spent by the end of the financial year. Staffing also may still not be sufficient to oversee the huge expenditure of UK taxpayers' money undertaken by multilaterals. MPs remain concerned that DFID's has ended its bilateral programme in one of the world's poorest countries, Burundi, and is urging the new Secretary of State to re-instate it.

The seventh edition of Textbook on Administrative Law continues to provide students with an accessible and stimulating guide to the subject. Practical in approach, the authors concentrate on fully analysing core topics, while at the same time setting them within a contextual and thematic framework.

It is inevitable that the UK will have strategic, commercial or security-related interests overseas which have the potential to conflict with its human rights work, says the Foreign Affairs Committee in a report published today. The Government should not be trying to assert that the two can co-exist freely: it should instead be explaining publicly its judgments on how to balance them in particular cases. The Committee's recommendation comes in the light of the FCO's decision not to designate Bahrain as a "country of concern" in its 2011 report on its human rights work, despite the repression of demonstrations in Bahrain in 2011. The Committee recommends that the criteria for designation should be based purely on assessments of human rights standards and should not be coloured by strategic or other considerations. The Committee also challenges the Government for being inconsistent in not taking a public stance on the Bahrain Grand Prix but boycotting group stage games at Euro 2012 in Ukraine. On rendition, the Committee finds that the protracted police investigations had an unacceptable impact on the work of the Gibson Inquiry and of relevant committees. The Government should explain why current investigations into claims of rendition made by two Libyans are expected to take so long. The Committee accepts that enough progress has been made in Burma to justify some relaxation of the EU's sanctions regime, but it says that Burma's human rights record remains seriously blemished. It recommends that the UK should call for better access to those still detained as political prisoners, and should press the Burmese authorities to allow independent observers to visit Rakhine state, to assess the extent to which the rights of the Rohingya minority are being respected.

Today, India’s education sector remains a victim of poor policies, restrictive regulations and orthodoxy. Despite being enrolled in schools, children are not learning adequately. Increasingly, parents are seeking alternatives through private inputs in school and tuition. Students are dropping out from secondary school in spite of high financial returns of secondary education, and those who do complete it have inferior conceptual knowledge. Higher education is over-regulated and under-governed, keeping away serious private providers and reputed global institutes. Graduates from high schools, colleges and universities are not readily employable, and few are willing to pay for skill development. Ironically, the Right to Education Act, if strictly enforced, will result in closure of thousands of non-state schools, and millions of poor children will be left without access to education. Eleventh in the series, India Infrastructure Report 2012 discusses challenges in the education sector — elementary, secondary, higher, and vocational — and explores strategies for constructive change and opportunities for the private sector. It suggests that immediate steps are required to reform the sector to reap the benefits from India’s ‘demographic dividend’ due to a rise in the working age population. Result of a collective effort led by the IDFC Foundation, this Report brings together a range of perspectives from academics, researchers and practitioners committed to enhancing educational practices. It will be an invaluable resource for policymakers, researchers and corporates.