Response to IPSO adjudication

24 July 2017
News

“We are concerned that this adjudication by IPSO has shifted the goalposts on what is fair and accurate journalism.

A Commonwealth Secretariat spokesman said:

“We are concerned that this adjudication by IPSO has shifted the goalposts on what is fair and accurate journalism. The adjudication makes clear that if someone is accused of a false allegation and denies it, then newspapers can repeat these false claims without fear of sanctions simply because they approached that individual for comment. 

"The message that IPSO has sent out today is extremely worrying.”

For further details, please see below.

Where allegations have reflected untruths, half-truths and unwarranted innuendo in the media, these have been consistently rebutted to the press and broadcasters, when they have made enquiries, and to IPSO during the course of the complaint.  Furthermore,  where conclusions drawn by IPSO in the course of its deliberations have been erroneous we have made clear that we do not agree with its conclusions or position.   Since the subsequent ruling has not been based on whether such allegations have been true or accurate, or have any basis in fact,  we summarise in relation to the main issues our position below for the public record.

1.  Refurbishment of official residence

The Secretary-General has been severely maligned for the alleged lavish spending for the refurbishment of the official residence of the Commonwealth Secretary-General.  It should be made clear that:

 i) the official residence is owned by the 52 member states of the Commonwealth. The lease sets out specific conditions for its regular  refurbishment;

ii) the work for the refurbishment was put out to tender and a contractor selected BEFORE Secretary-General Scotland was even elected;

iii) the award of the contract to a contractor was  published on the Secretariat's website in January 2016 BEFORE Secretary-General Scotland took office; 

iv) Secretary-General Scotland did not micro-manage the refurbishment, as is the case with any CEO of any organisation; 

v) when the Secretary-General was made aware of the costs of some proposals being made to improve the refurbishment, she ordered that there must be no extravagance and this directive was implemented; 

vi) the professional evaluation which had to be done following the refurbishment concluded that: ‘It is important to reiterate that the partial upgrading works undertaken to the subject property will be perceived by the local market as cosmetic and as a consequence potential purchasers will regard it as a refurbishment opportunity.’

2.       Review of the Secretariat

The Secretariat hired KYA Global, Professor Lord Patel’s company, wholly in accordance with its procurement rules, to review the work of the Secretariat. Since the Secretary-General had just assumed duty, it is a nonsense to state that it was to 'review her performance'. The three-person review team carried out its intensive work over a period of six months which resulted in recommendations for substantial reform of the Secretariat's working practices and structure. These recommendations are already being implemented.

Associated Newspapers was told repeatedly that the money it claimed Professor Lord Patel was being paid was wrong, yet it continued to repeat these falsehoods. It has now belatedly acknowledged its mistake both in relation to the nature of the work undertaken and the associated cost and has been ordered by IPSO to make amends and corrections. We welcome this acknowledgement and correction. 
 
3.       Body of work in human rights

The Secretary-General carried out an important body of work in her professional capacity as a leading member of the Bar of England, Wales and Northern Ireland. She is also well-known as a champion of pro bono work. 

In regard to all her work as a leading barrister, Secretary-General Scotland remains bound by legal and professional privilege.  

She is widely recognised as one of the best campaigners for human rights, social justice and the rule of law, and has always done so in accordance with the values of the Commonwealth Charter which she continues to champion in her role as Secretary-General.
 
4.    The Constantinian Order of St George 

Baroness Scotland had no power to and did not influence the Constantinian Order or any sovereign member state with regard to honours.   Baroness Scotland was appointed vice-delegate of the Constantinian Order in June 2015, in place of another prominent and well respected Catholic, Professor The Lord Alton of Liverpool, on completion of his three-year term. She informed the Order from the outset that she would be unable to take up the appointment because she was seeking election as Secretary-General. Baroness Scotland was persuaded to accept the post on a nominal interim basis while the Order sought a more permanent replacement for Lord Alton. She relinquished it once she became Secretary-General. During that five-month period she undertook no missions, took no actions and signed no documents on behalf of the Order.  Baroness Scotland certainly made no recommendations for awards to anyone nor did she have any power or seek to award any member states with any honours.

Secretary-General Scotland continues to admire any organisation which strives, on a pro bono basis,  to bring relief to the poor, the destitute and the needy across the world.

5.    DfID report on Secretariat's 2015 performance 

Since taking up office, Secretary-General Scotland has been praised by member states for her vision, progressive approach and leadership in delivering positive outcomes to the challenges identified by member states as well as bringing a new vitality and relevance to the Commonwealth. 

The DfID report for 2015 covered the period BEFORE Secretary-General Scotland assumed office, which she did on 1 April 2016. The implication that the report covered any part of the period she has been in office or that she had some responsibility for the alleged “historic poor performance and poor value for money” of the organisation is therefore completely untrue. 

Baroness Scotland came in on a reform platform to ensure that the organisation was fit for purpose and able to respond effectively to the needs of member states in the rapidly changing global environment.  In the year that she has just completed, she carried out reforms to make the Secretariat more accountable and transparent, negotiated and signed a Performance Agreement with DfID, as a large funder, and as some other intergovernmental organisations have been required to do. Further, DfID has expressed satisfaction with the swiftness and direction of the steps taken to date.

The Secretary-General has had approved by the Board of Governors the Strategic Plan for the next four years starting 1 July 2017, and,  for the first time, a Delivery Plan based on anticipated resources in the first year of the Strategic Plan. 

The Secretary-General has restructured the Secretariat based on a more cohesive, integrated and results-based model, which came into effect on 1 July 2017.

On a  parallel track, strides have been made in substantive programmes that are responsive to the 52  member states needs, such as the opening for business of the Commonwealth Office of Civil and Criminal Justice Reform (OCCJR). The Office has been warmly welcomed and has been described by some Commonwealth countries as a 'game changer'. 

In this the  first year under Secretary-General Scotland's leadership, the Secretariat has been: leading the way in developing  best practice when it comes to fighting corruption; tackling climate change through regenerative development; winning plaudits for its innovative approach to developing  a blue economy and creating a Blue Commonwealth Charter; continuing to explore ways to increase the trade advantage among Commonwealth countries;  launching a Commonwealth  SME trade alliance in India; helping member states with challenges they face such as derisking and debt management; strategically encouraging youth as current and  future leaders of the Commonwealth;  empowering women and girls and campaigning for peace in the home; launching a Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) unit; enhancing and broadening its support for good governance and election monitoring;  and working with other agencies and partners with a view to pursuing programmes that will provide practical benefits for the member states of  the Commonwealth. 

The praise for ensuring that the Commonwealth Secretariat continues to be a thought-leader and builds on the Commonwealth effect falls to its committed staff. Staff past and present have contributed to the solid foundation on which to build.  Appreciation is due to the many member states which have expressed their support and solidarity,  orally and in writing, and indicated that the Secretariat is indeed on a path that is responsive to their needs.