§ 54. Mr. Deakinsasked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs to what extent the aid and trade provision in 1985–86 and 1986–87 is to be funded from sources outside his Department.
§ The Minister for Overseas Development (Mr. Timothy Raison)The aid and trade provision is a separate allocation of funds within the aid programme. It is not funded from any other source.
§ Mr. DeakinsIs it not inequitable that the Department of Trade and Industry, which gets most of the benefit from the ATP, makes no contribution towards the total and rising cost of that provision? Will the Minister consider seriously for the future asking his colleagues in the Department of Trade and Industry for a contribution, either in whole or in part?
§ Mr. RaisonThe hon. Gentleman must understand that the funds for the ATP come from public expenditure funds as a whole. It is important to remember that the ATP provides both jobs and employment in Britain, and schemes of real developmental value in the Third world.
§ Mr. FormanWill my right hon. Friend tell the House whether, if the ATP were to come from a different departmental budget, for example the Department of Trade and Industry budget, the scheme, which is admirable and needs to be expanded, might fall foul of GATT rules?
§ Mr. RaisonMy hon. Friend is broadly right. The important point is that this is aid. It counts as, and is recorded as, aid, and is directed to developmental as well as commercial ends.
§ Mr. BeithIs it not the case that the ATP has virtually trebled in size, while provision for rural development has decreased? Is it not inevitable that such emphasis on the ATP will distort the priorities which the Minister's Department should have as its main concern?
§ Mr. RaisonThe ATP has certainly increased in size over the years since it was started by the right hon. Member for Clydesdale (Dame J. Hart). However, we are now putting increasing emphasis on rural development, and I recently announced some valuable schemes.