Recommendation 17

We asked the Department how it would benchmark its trade promotion activities against those of countries such as Singapore and Hong Kong. The Department said that it 34 Q 30; C&AG’s report, para 4.19; Department for International Trade, Impact assessment of the Free Trade Agreement between the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and Australia, 2021, part 8: Plans to monitor and evaluate the agreement 35 Q 34 36 Q 53 37 C&AG’s Report, para 4.16 38 Committee of Public Accounts, Government support for UK exporters, Twenty-First Report of Session 2019–21, HC 679, 28 October 2020 39 Q 4 40 Q 52 41 Q 57 42 Qq 52, 54 43 Letter from Permanent Secretary, DIT, to the Chairs of the Public Accounts Committee and the International Trade Committee, 4 February 2022 https://committees.parliament.uk/publications/8916/documents/152325/ default/ 14 Progress with trade negotiations had developed an analytical framework to sit alongside the new export strategy that would be used to measure its success.44 It told us that it was moving away from taking credit for deals made by large companies where the Department’s role was questionable and focusing more on SMEs instead. However, when we asked about the outcomes of a specific export support activity—a virtual mission held by the Department to raise awareness of the UK-Japan trade agreement attended by around 250 businesses—the Department was unable to say if it had led to any export deals being signed.45