HC Deb 19 July 1976 vol 915 cc1280-3
36. Mr. Bryan Davies

asked the Minister for overseas Development what were the contributions per head of population to official Government overseas aid and development programmes in 1975 for each of the following countries: Australia, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Luxembourg, France, West Germany, Italy, Ireland, Japan, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, United States of America and the United Kingdom; what was the percentage of gross national product of each of these countries devoted to these official programmes in the same year; and whether he will make a statement.

Mr. Prentice

I have arranged for this information to be published in the Official Report.

Mr. Davies

Will my right hon. Friend also arrange for the Cabinet to be kept fully informed of the figures?

Mr. Prentice

Yes. My hon. Friend will not be surprised to know that I have made certain of that.

Mr. Onslow

Has the right hon. Gentleman ever thought of copying the example of Switzerland and having a referendum on the expenditure on aid, or is he afraid that it might produce the same result in this country?

Mr. Prentice

I hope that a referendum in this country would not produce the depelorable result of the recent one in Switzerland. I hope and believe that the majority of citizens in this country would have sufficient sense of the moral issues and long-term self-interest involved to give a different verdict.

Mr. Lane

Will the Minister bear in mind that a number of us on the Opposition Benches hope that he will be left with a still expanding aid programme after the current review of public expenditure?

Mr. Prentice

I think that one of the most important factors in the aid debate in this House over the years has been the general agreement between those who have participated in them on the need to have a programme which increases steadily in quantity to meet the United Nations target and increases in its quality and effectiveness.

Mr. Cryer

Is my right hon. Friend aware that we hope that his aid programme will be maintained and that he will not rely on private enterprise to bolster it? Is he aware that private enter- prise investment here or abroad is designed not to benefit the people but to exploit them? Is he further aware that it is far better for underdeveloped countries if aid is generated where it is most needed and is not left to the whims and exploitation of private enterprise capitalism?

Mr. Prentice

In many cases private investment can be to the benefit of developing countries and should not be described as exploitation. At the same time, it is not a substitute for official flows of aid. As I indicated in a reply to an earlier question, the developing countries need more of both.

Mr. Ian Lloyd

Irrespective of moral judgments or hypothetical referenda, in our present economic circumstances would it not be an excellent idea to publish our overseas aid not only as a percentage of our own gross national product but as a percentage of what we are borrowing?

Mr. Prentice

No, Sir. I think it is important to recognise that there is an international commitment to the United Nations target in this matter, and that this country has an obligation—as have all other countries in the richer one-third of the world—to meet that target as soon as its circumstances permit.

Mr. Tugendhat

When the Minister publishes the figures, will he also include figures which show that the United Kingdom gains a quite disproportionately large share of the orders placed by the developing countries out of the multilateral aid they receive from institutions to which we contribute?

Mr. Prentice

This will not arise in the reply because it was not in the original Question, but I am grateful to the hon. Member for drawing attention to it. It is not sufficiently realised among those who make ill-informed criticism of the aid programme that we get a very considerable direct economic return in the sense that the hon. Gentleman has mentioned, as well as in other senses. On top of that there is an imponderable return in trade and in goodwill which cannot be precisely measured. I am absolutely convinced that if there had been no aid programme from this country in the last 20 years our balance of payments and many other problems would be worse today than they are.

Following is the information:

Country Net Official Development Assistance as percentage of GNP Percent. Net Official Development Assistance per head of population $
Australia 0.61 38
Belgium 0.59 39
Canada 0.57 39
Denmark 0.58 41
France 0.63 40
West Germany 0.40 27
Italy 0.11 3
Japan 0.24 10
Netherlands 0.75 45
New Zealand 0.52 22
Norway 0.66 46
Sweden 0.82 69
Switzerland 0.19 16
United States of America 0.27 19
United Kingdom 0.38 15

1975 figures are still provisional and the OECD, which has recently provided an indication of 1975 aid flows, does not have figures for Ireland or Luxembourg who are not members of the OECD's Development Assistance Committee.