The increase in overseas aid has cross-party support because it is right and it works
In these times of austerity there are few areas of spending which enjoy cross-party support yet as the budget looms this Wednesday all three main parties are still committed to Britain reaching its aid target of 0.7 per cent of GNI by 2013. Yes, there have been grumblings of parliamentary dissent but it is to the credit of the coalition government, and Labour’s continued pressure, that the increase in aid spending remains likely to be met. What will be achieved through this ramping up of overseas aid is revealed today in a new report by the ONE campaign and the findings are remarkable.
Over the last few months there has been a slow but steady stream of negative blogs and opinion pieces questioning the impact of UK aid but offering little evidence to back up their claims. At the same time several commentators have argued that aid could be better spent at home plugging the huge gaps in spending on areas ranging from the police to the health system. Neither of these criticisms are grounded in evidence. In contrast, this new independently researched analysis of UK aid highlights the huge improvements Britain can make in the lives of the world’s poorest people and all for less than two pence in every pound of taxpayers’ money.
Through Britain’s bilateral and multilateral aid programmes – money Britain gives directly to developing countries and money given via organisations such as the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunisations and the UN – we will be directly responsible for sending a further 15.9 million children to school, for vaccinating over 80 million children against life-threatening diseases, and for supporting a massive 40 million people with prevention or treatment for malaria, a preventable disease which still affects a shocking 216 million people annually. Its figures like these, which show the incredible return on investment, which aid gives. For a comparatively small amount of money the UK is having an incredible impact in helping the poorest people in the world.
What the aid critics have got right is that a never-ending flow of aid is not the answer. Yet to argue we should simply pull the plug now and stop supporting the most vulnerable people in the world is wrong. Britain, like other donor nations, is working with developing countries to support their diversification away from aid. At the same time as UK aid is fighting disease and hunger it is also helping build a platform for people and countries to live independently without the need for outside support. Between now and 2015 British aid will be used to open up access to formal financial services such as bank accounts or lines of credit to over 77.6 million people. 50,000 small- and medium-sized businesses, the bedrock of economic development, will be provided with financial assistance. It is estimated this will leverage £5.7bn, which can be put into new investments to benefit the poor.
Finally, there is the issue of governance. It is notoriously difficult to prove the impact foreign aid can have on fostering democracy, civil society and political rights but over the next four years the UK government has committed itself to helping a further 59 million people to hold their governments and decisionmakers to account. It is also aiming to support democratic elections in 13 countries with a combined population of over 300 million people.
It is true that if redirected to domestic spending UK aid money could have an impact back home. But this isn’t a zero-sum game. UK aid, even when it rises to 0.7 per cent of GNI next year, will still be a tiny proportion of the overall UK budget while the impact it will have on people living in a level of poverty incomprehensible to most British people is immense. Continuing overseas development aid is morally right but it is also important to show that this money will have an impact and make a difference. This new report shows that it clearly will.
—————————————————————————————