Brexit: Department for International Trade hiring "almost exclusively from Whitehall", says recruitment chief

Written by Civil Service World on 29 November 2016 in News
News

DIT officials say Whitehall has trebled its trade policy staff numbers since the referendum, and stress focus on training up existing staff rather than drafting in outsiders

The Department for International Trade wants to build the trade skills of existing civil servants rather than buy in outside help as the UK prepares to leave the European Union, according to the new organisation's director of capability.

In the months following this summer's Brexit vote, much attention has been paid to the lack of trade policy experience inside Whitehall, a result of four decades in which responsibility for trade deals involving the UK has been handed to the EU.

But DIT's Oliver Griffiths, who is leading the new department's work to ensure it has the resources for a post-Brexit world, told MPs on Tuesday that the DIT had been able to draw on existing internal expertise as it begins work, and pointed to a trebling of its trade policy staff numbers since the referendum.


Autumn Statement vows £400m for key Brexit departments – as union warns of exit "on the cheap"
Autumn Statement 2016: FCO in joint bid for £10m to hire Brexit-focused trade policy staff​
Department for International Trade launches recruitment drive to meet Brexit challenge


"We start from a core that was strong on trade policy," he said. "We had about 45 people in June that were focused on trade policy – albeit within the context of that being a support position for the European Commission in the EU. Now that's the core that we're building from. We're about 100 up from that."

Last week's Autumn Statement confirmed that the Foreign Office and Department for International Trade are to be given an extra £26m a year by 2019-20 to strengthen trade policy capability, and CSW understands that this extra money will lead to a five-fold increase in the number of people working on trade issues across government.

Griffiths said that the DIT's leadership had "an important decision" to make as it expands: whether to "buy" in or "build" trade policy clout.

"Our strong preference will always be to build," he said. "And our focus on recruitment to date has been almost exclusively from Whitehall."

A dedicated trade faculty has already been set up in the Foreign Office to help with what Griffiths called the "huge weight" of building those skills among existing civil servants, and James Norton – DIT's HR and organisational development director – said the department had plans to grow its trade policy staff numbers to 350 "by the end of the year".

John Alty, the DIT's director general for trade policy said the department's work remained "very much at a planning and exploratory stage" before next year's expected triggering of Article 50, the formal process by which the UK kicks off two years of talks on its EU exit.

Until then, Alty pointed out, the UK has "an obligation as members of the EU not to run an independent trade policy", although he said the department had already heard from countries "interested in talking to us about future trading arrangements".

"We obviously feed into the preparations for the Article 50 negotiations in so far as they may affect trade," he said. "But the direction of travel will become clearer as the government takes these decisions about how it wants to negotiate with the EU."

Meanwhile, Griffiths set out the scale of the task facing the DIT in the years ahead, pointing out that a typical free trade agreement is split into 20 to 30 chapters, each covering a different area of the economy. Such agreements are, he said, usually supported by a team of "50-100 people, depending on how big the negotiation is".

Griffiths said that striking deals at that scale will call for officials both with detailed policy knowledge and the "experience and skills to carry out a negotiation in a very complex multi-stakeholder environment".

It was on this second area, he added, where Whitehall may need to eventually draw on outside help.

"We've done a lot of the latter in the civil service in the past," he said. "But I think it would be a mistake to just look at the civil service and so, as we move into that detailed negotiation phase [...] in the future we would certainly be looking to have those posts opened to the best and the brightest both in the public and private sectors."

Share this page

Further reading in our policy hubs

Add new comment

Comments

Norman Strauss (not verified)

Submitted on 29 November, 2016 - 18:35
Meritocratic competitiveness is about mastery of excellence, teamwork, creativity, knowledge, scholarship, clarity, distinction, strategy and systems thinking. That's why some of us think that the experience of career civil servants probably does not suit them to taking the lead in aggressive games, mapping of causal links, systems analysis and competitive strategy. Existing staff are likely to have a misguided ethos for the task, executed within an often complacent or even arrogant culture. This combination is unlikely to succeed at gaming through hostile negotiations so as to create national advantage. Putting key actors in departments with different names and giving them different titles and responsibilities does not radically change this suspected ingrained deficiency. It is not their fault and one sympathises; but, if the system does not change, then they are not going to either - without putting their careers in harm's way. Outsiders are needed with different backgrounds, irregular, awkward, troubling and badly house-trained tendencies, idiosyncratic points of view and a willingness to conduct hostile negotiations as and when they prove to be needed - as they surely will. They must provide new ways of seeing the world and behaving in it, that ingrained group-think and behaviour does not explore, favour or permit. Will these new departments and roles, at the very least take a leaf out of the US Government's "A Trade Craft Primer", offering structured analytical techniques for improving intelligence analysis and having regular opposing devil's advocate red team v blue team exercises, the better to prepare themselves in advance for strategically analysed hostilities - well before the game is afoot?

Contact the author

The contact details for the Civil Service World editorial team are available on our About Us page.

Related Articles

Related Sponsored Articles