Previous page | Contents | Next page
The Report of the Iraq Inquiry
playing one Government department off against another”. The Ad Hoc Ministerial Group
could have been controlled the budget.
662.  Mr Neil Crompton, the Head of IPU, reflected on the availability of funding in his
May 2005 valedictory minute to Mr John Sawers:
“HMG (and the FCO) took a long time to wake up to the scale of the task we had
taken on. Demands from No.10 and Ministers for action have always exceeded
the resources available. The Treasury have played hard ball, exploiting different
departments’ own internal reasons for not wanting to make claims on the Reserve to
kill off initiatives. No.10’s unwillingness to intervene with HMT [the Treasury], except
once, has compounded the problem, and undermined the morale of officials tasked
with running an ‘exemplary operation’ without the resources to do so.
“It is naive to expect the Treasury to behave differently. But Ministers (and the
FCO) need to recognise that in a conflict we cannot afford the luxury of ensuring
expenditure is subject ‘to the same rigorous criteria as anywhere else’, as we have
occasionally been told.”413
663.  Mr Crompton recommended that, in future, the Ad Hoc Ministerial Group or
equivalent should be allocated a budget to fund immediate priorities not covered by
departments’ core budgets or by funds such as the GCPP. That would avoid the need for
“extended negotiations” with the Treasury.
664.  In his response to Mr Crompton, Mr Sawers, FCO Political Director, agreed that the
FCO needed to give a much higher priority to an issue when it “prevails over all others”,
in terms of both money and people.414 The FCO had done that in the pre‑conflict phase,
but it had been less apparent in the post‑conflict phase.
665.  A June 2005 FCO Conflict Issues Group paper drawing together post‑conflict
lessons for the FCO concluded:
“We need to make it clear to other government departments the true cost of what
they are asking us to achieve. We can spend too much time trying to secure extra
resources and fail to secure them in a timely manner. Policy without resources is
usually futile. All OGDs [other government departments] need to be required to
allocate resources to tasks which the Cabinet rules to be important.”415
666.  An FCO review of lessons to be learned from the UK’s experience in Basra,
produced in late 2008, concluded:
“… The FCO was constantly scrambling after resources. Risk management
should ensure that realistic estimates of resources are made at an early stage,
413 Minute Crompton to Sawers, 4 May 2005, ‘Iraq: Reflections’.
414 Minute Sawers to Crompton, 9 May 2005, ‘Iraq: Reflections’.
415 Paper FCO CIG, June 2005, ‘Post Conflict Lessons Learned Exercise’.
554
Previous page | Contents | Next page