The Foreign Affairs Committee believes the events of the 'Arab Spring' should stand as a reminder to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) that failing to take a stronger and more consistent stance against human rights violations by overseas regimes can carry risks for the UK. Any suggestion that the FCO downplays criticism of human rights abuses in countries with which the UK has close political and commercial links is damaging to the UK's reputation and undermines the department's overall work in promoting human rights overseas. The Committee is less confident than the FCO that there is little conflict between its simultaneous pursuit of both UK commercial interests and improved human rights standards overseas. The Committee heard concerns on this front with respect to Saudi Arabia and Bahrain in particular. There should be a more robust and significantly more consistent position on human rights violations in the Middle East and North Africa. On China, the Committee finds it difficult to support the Government's approach to human rights engagement with China in the continuing absence of any evidence that it is yielding results, and when the human rights situation in China appears to be deteriorating. The Government should engage in more explicit, hard-hitting and consistent public criticisms of human rights abuses in China. The Committee welcomes the FCO's continued production of an annual human rights report and the Government's recognition that the UK's own human rights practices affect its international reputation and ability to pursue improvements in human rights standards overseas.

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.

The FCO designated 28 countries of concern in its 2013 report, where it judged the gravity of the human rights abuses to be so severe that a particular focus should be applied. The Committee concentrated attention on three of these countries: Sri Lanka, Burma, and Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories. Favourable trade concessions to the EU market should be removed from Sri Lanka if the Government of Sri Lanka continues to deny the OHCHR investigation team access into the country. The Government should advocate re-imposition of sanctions by the EU if there is no improvement in the human rights situation in Burma. The human rights of Israeli, Palestinian and Bedouin citizens living in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories continue to be of serious concern to the UK.

The FCO was timid and inconsistent in the discussions which led to the decision to award to Sri Lanka the right to host the 2013 CHOGM. It should have taken a more robust approach since, in the light of continuing human rights abuses in the country. In 2009 the FCO objected to Sri Lanka hosting the 2011 CHOGM but did not obstruct a proposal that it might do so in 2013, nor did it insist that Sri Lanka's right to host in 2013 should be conditional on improvements in human rights. The Committee took evidence from the BBC World Service on jamming and denial of access to its broadcast and internet services, particularly in Iran and China. The Committee calls on the BBC to recognise in future funding plans the need to provide the resources necessary to afford protection. All providers of satellite services have a commercial interest in defeating jamming. The report considers Government policy on human rights in Burma and concludes that the EU's decision to lift economic sanctions in April 2013 was the right one, given the remarkable progress made in Burma. But it warns that the UK should be prepared to advocate re-imposition of sanctions if undertakings on human rights are not followed through. The Government should also urge condemnation of those responsible for violence in Rakhine State in 2012. The Committee does not support suggestions that the 2014 Winter Olympic and Paralympic Games should be boycotted in protest against human rights abuses in Russia

On cover and title page: House, committees of the whole House, general committees and select committees

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.

The Foreign Affairs Committee believes the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) will not be back at the centre of Government and able to lead UK foreign policy, in line with the Foreign Secretary's ambitions, unless it can provide deep foreign policy expertise and judgement to underpin and implement Government decision-making. The FCO must have the resources and skills required to fulfil this role, especially specialist geographical expertise and knowledge of foreign languages. The FCO has a vital role to play for the Government, namely the timely provision of world-class foreign policy information, analysis, judgement and execution. Finances, people and buildings must be well-managed, but managerial requirements must not divert time and focus disproportionately from the FCO's core foreign policy functions. Given the resource constraints facing the FCO, however, there is doubt whether the department can achieve the Government's ambitions for enhanced commercial work while maintaining its core foreign policy functions at the required standard. The committee regards the FCO's network of overseas posts as integral to the department's ability to discharge its functions, and recommends that the FCO should seek to maintain a global UK presence. The committee also called "confusing" the fact that under the current Government the FCO has three sets of priorities: the Foreign Secretary's, the Cabinet Office's Business Plan for the department, and the 2010 Strategic Defence and Security Review.