§ 3. Mr. Tilneyasked the Minister of Overseas Development what percentage of Britain's aid overseas to developing countries and territories was tied to 206 British exports in each of the last three years.
§ Mr. PrenticeApproximately 59 per cent., 60 per cent., and 58 per cent. of our bilateral financial aid was tied in 1966, 1967 and 1968 respectively. Bilateral financial aid is about 65 per cent. of our total programme.
§ Mr. TilneySince one cannot invest a deficit or give it away, cannot these percentages be made a little bigger?
§ Mr. PrenticeNo, Sir. I think it essential, in existing circumstances, while most other aid donors tie a lot of their aid, that we should tie a lot of ours. At the same time the development projects on which we are co-operating must be projects which are viable in the area concerned. This very often involves considerable expenditure on local costs.
§ 4. Mr. Tilneyasked the Minister of Overseas Development whether he will seek to initiate joint aid projects to developing countries with the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany.
§ Mr. PrenticeI would refer the hon. Member to my Answer of 25th February to my hon. Friend the Member for Bebington (Mr. Brooks). I was visited last week by the Federal German Minister for Economic Co-operation, Dr. Erhard Eppler, with whom I have had a useful and wide-ranging discussion on a number of important issues in the field of development aid.—[Vol. 778, c. 1255.]
§ Mr. TilneyBut since those who deal with aid in the Federal Repubic say that they have difficulties over the English tongue and over contacts in the British part of the developing Commonwealth, and since there is money available in Germany, would the right hon. Gentleman look at this again and see whether we cannot have a joint approach?
§ Mr. PrenticeDr. Eppler and his officials showed great expertness in the English tongue during their visit, which was very lucky for me. On the broader question, I am willing to look at any aspect of co-operation, but so far as aid projects are concerned, rather than their being arranged bilaterally between two donors, the best thing would be for them to be co-ordinated and channelled through O.E.C.D. and other multilateral organisations.
§ Mr. BraineIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that both my hon. Friend and I on a recent visit to Germany were disturbed to find that there was little co-operation between our two countries in the aid field, and a great deal of overlapping, and that there appeared to be a desire to get closer together with us, especially in regard to joint schemes and joint action to insure against political risk?
§ Mr. PrenticeI would not agree that there is a great deal of overlapping, which is avoided in many ways, not only between Germany and ourselves but with other aid donors. I am always willing to look at new methods of co-operation with my German opposite number, and some of these were discussed a few days ago.
§ 5. Mr. Evelyn Kingasked the Minister of Overseas Development what he estimates will be this year's cost to public funds in respect of aid given to underdeveloped countries which are and which are not, respectively, members of the British Commonwealth.
§ Mr. PrenticeIn 1968–69, £160 million for Commonwealth countries, excluding contingency aid to Zambia, and £21 million for foreign countries. In addition, multilateral aid is estimated at £34 million but cannot be apportioned between Commonwealth and foreign countries.
§ Mr. KingBut cannot we begin to move forward to the point at which need as a criterion begins to exceed past association?
§ Mr. PrenticeIt is sensible that not only Britain but other aid donors should provide a large proportion of their aid programme for countries with which they have historical connections. There are mutual experiences here and various links which help to ensure that the aid is administered efficiently and more quickly than it would be if one were starting afresh elsewhere.
§ 17. Mr. Alexander W. Lyonasked the Minister of Overseas Development what was the percentage of gross national product of British official overseas aid in 1964 and in 1968.
§ Mr. PrenticeThe figure for 1964 is 0.58 per cent. The figure for 1968 is not yet available, but that for 1967 was 0.53 per cent.
§ Mr. LyonSince it seems that the percentage for 1968 will be even lower, would my right hon. Friend say which other Department of State, other than Defence, is getting a smaller percentage of the gross national product than it was getting in 1964?
§ Mr. PrenticeI could not answer that without notice, and even if I had notice I should probably have to transfer the question to one of my right hon. Friends. The House should recognise that the amount of aid has increased under the present Government. Because the G.N.P. has increased faster, the percentage is somewhat down, as I indicated in my original Answer.
§ Mr. BraineIs it not a fact that the developing countries look not only for official aid for their development but for private investment as well? Has not there been the same decline in that sector in terms of the proportion of the G.N.P. as hi the case of official aid and has not this been due to the discouragement which the Government have consistently given to private overseas investment? Will the right hon. Gentleman have a talk with the Chancellor of the Exchequer about this?
§ Mr. PrenticeThat also goes rather wide of my responsibilities. I agree, however, that private flows are important and are included in the U.N.C.T.A.D. target to which we are committed. Adding together private and official flows, we are reaching about 0.8 per cent. of the 1 per cent. of the G.N.P. to which we are committed and which we hope to reach as soon as possible.
§ Mr. Hugh JenkinsIs not my right hon. Friend falling short of his aims and ambitions in this respect and are not the Government falling short of their policy in regard to aid? What does my right hon. Friend propose to do about it?
§ Mr. PrenticeI suggest that the aims and ambitions of all hon. Members are designed to reach a higher performance in this respect as soon as our balance of payments problem allows us to do so.