Conclusion
MANAGEMENT IN CONFIDENCE
14.
In brief, Heads of Mission and their staffs should go
no further than officials in the UK would be prepared to go. (Where the FCO has already given evidence in London on the
inquiry in question, posts will be sent the record). They should avoid setting precedents which could be used against
other Missions on future occasions. They should limit themselves to matters of fact relating to existing policy or to conditions in the country in which they are serving. They should avoid comment on alternative policies or future
policy. Heads of Mission are directly responsible to
Ministers in the UK for the replies they give, and it is
perfectly legitimate to say that a particular question or line of questioning cannot be answered without prior
reference to Ministers. Committees have received copies of
the Memorandum of Guidance and Members should be familiar
with its contents. It should not therefore cause embarrassment to reply to them in this way.
Types of Evidence
15. A note on types of evidence taken by the Foreign
Affairs Committee is at Annex A (which although dated July 1981 is still current). The procedures it describes are
also broadly speaking those followed by other Select
Committees.
Parliamentary Relations Unit
November 1988
MANAGEMENT IN CONFIDENCE