Tories may sacrifice Africa to fund climate change fight
Warning from campaigners over Conservative plans to rethink Britain’s aid budget
Digg
del.icio.us
Facebook
Reddit
Google
Stumble Upon
Fark
Newsvine
YahooBuzz
Bebo
Twitter
Independent Minds
A Tory Government could cut Britain's £9bn-a-year overseas aid budget by diverting up to £2bn of it to tackling climate change, aid agencies warned today.
A draft Tory policy statement, leaked to The Independent, reveals that a Tory Government would give the Department for International Development (DFID) a bigger role in helping developing countries meet the cost of combating climate change. But aid groups fear this would be a cover for cutting funds to Africa.
The Tories' green paper, which will be launched on Monday by David Cameron, will reiterate the party's pledge to match Labour's commitment to spend 0.7 per cent of national income on aid by 2013. Aid and National Health Service budgets are the only two budgets which would be protected by an incoming Cameron Government as it sought deep public spending cuts to balance the nation's books.
But the promise on aid has been called into question, with suspicions that the party plans to funnel funds away from aid towards spending to fight global warming. The Tory paper says: "Action to tackle and adapt to climate change will permeate international development policy under a Conservative Government. It requires a multi-faceted approach. We will mainstream adaptation to the impacts of climate change throughout DFID's work by supporting development activities that reflect the changing nature of the climate."
Pressure groups are deeply concerned about the "mainstreaming" policy because the document makes no mention of a ceiling on how much of the DFID budget could be spent on climate change. Gordon Brown has promised a 10 per cent cap if Labour retains power. He has proposed a £100bn climate change adaptation fund as part of the negotiations on a new global deal to be discussed at a summit in Copenhagen in December. There has been persistent speculation in Tory circles that the party would try to spend less on helping the world's poorest countries.
Andrew Mitchell, the shadow Secretary of State for International Development, said: "The Conservative Party is fully committed to tackling both the causes and consequences of climate change, and the Department for International Development has an important role to play in this. Above all we will push for an ambitious international agreement that limits emissions and sees substantial financial resources made available to help developing countries adapt to the changing climate."
Kevin Watkins, a director at UNESCO, said that the spending on climate change could see the amount spent on traditional aid fall below the 2013 target. "The 0.7 per cent commitment is not unequivocal," he said. "The money spent on climate change could take a big chunk of the department's budget, meaning aid will be hit." Another aid agency head said yesterday: "It seems that the Tories would divert a lot of money from aid to climate change, while keeping the headline pledge on aid spending. That would mean a lot less help for Africa."
Aid groups are also worried about a Tory plan to offer "vouchers" to people in poor countries so they could shop around for schools. They fear this could undermine attempts to build up the state education system in developing nations and help "middle class" children rather than the poorest. One aid worker said this would boost private schools, describing it as "as assisted places scheme for Africa." Mr Watkins said that the Tory focus on vouchers was "an absurdity" that would set back progress. "The idea that you can trot around slums and dish out vouchers is so far fetched that it shouldn't be taken seriously."
The Tory paper also suggests a key role for the private sector in improving health care. Pressure groups say this could threaten a global drive towards health care being free at the point of use. "Rather than aiming to replace or eliminate the private sector from healthcare, we will seek to work with governments and the private sector to help them achieve the Millennium Development Goals," the document states. "This could involve regulating providers and creating a framework that allows both private and public provision to grow in a coherent way, until ultimately people have access to affordable healthcare.
"There are many different ways to provide healthcare. All health systems feature a mixture of private and public provision. We will not insist that developing countries follow the exact path that we in Britain have taken—that is a choice for them to make."
View all comments that have been posted about this article.
Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.
- Print Article
- Email Article
-
Click here for copyright permissions
Copyright 2009 Independent News and Media Limited
Comments
use of water in this way will also lead to the reduction of global sea levels and the need for additional sea defences
In addition once sufficient waterhas been de-salinated then it could be used for solar generation of electricity to help to solve the world wide energy prospective future shortages. Ther ought o be enough space on theedge of the sahara to build enough power generation and a large UPS that would supply power even at night
WHO has a vested interest for this not to have been considered many years ago?
In short, they are poor because we are rich, relatively speaking. If you wish to impoverish such countries further, remember that will increase economic migrants, legal or illegal. Such migrants only come here because they can't make a living in their own countries. It's a shot in the dark, but 'm guessing that you don't really want them to come over here.
However, it is seems clear from the absurd voucher scheme that the Tories are intent on imposing Thatcherite solutions which will inevitably benefit the wealthy and further impoverish the poor.
Labour's track record on international development has been comparatively positive, especially as regards the program of debt cancellations.
I don't know, all I can say is more than sixty years ago while in school we were being urged every week to donate our 'pennies for black babies' yes that was what it was called at my school. Do not remember being asked to donate my pennies to help our sad, worn out, bombed Britain. Yes, we did donate our pennies. We were on rationing and had very few treats but what we had we shared.
However all this time later I would have expected African countries to have made a proper effort and pulled themselves together. Sorry, no more money let them finally learn to stand on their own two feet.
BTW have lived in Africa, in the fertile parts if you planted your finger it would grow, so rich is the soil.
Some African countries have tried to "pull themselves together", Tanzania and Ghana, for example. However, their efforts to make their economies vibrant have been seriously damaged by IMF structural adjustment programs, which enforce privatization of resources and services and reduce spending on health & education. Privatization, as we know from experience in this country, generally leads to rich investors getting richer and the rest of us suffering. This is even more the case in countries where the scrutiny of law is not as strict.
Much of the fertile land in Africa is used to grow cash crops for the West, another thing enforced by the IMF.
The Independent went into this matter in detail last May:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w