§ 36. Mr. RiddickTo ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what is the overseas development budget in 1992–93; and what is planned for 1993–94.
§ Mr. Lennox-BoydProvision for aid to developing countries is £1,831 million this year and £1,899 million for 1993–94.
§ Mr. RiddickAre those not enormous sums, and do they not demonstrate the Government's massive contribution and commitment to helping the poorest countries and people? Does my hon. Friend agree that by failing to tackle the problem of overpopulation in Rio world leaders have failed to tackle what is probably the most fundamental and pressing difficulty facing the third world today?
§ Mr. Lennox-BoydYes, they are indeed enormous sums. The issue of population figured rather more significantly at Rio than had at one time seemed likely, and we helped to give it the prominence that it deserved, against the reluctance of some countries to do so. The issue was and has been actively promoted by my right hon. and noble Friend the Minister for Overseas Development.
§ Ms. AbbottWill the Minister accept that the Government's aid budget is not in line with United Nations guidelines and that although overpopulation is an issue, it is not the fundamental cause of poverty in the third world? The fundamental cause of poverty, hunger and suffering in the third world is the economic relationship between those countries and the west—and that includes trade and aid. It would be very unfortunate if the issue of population, which is a real one, were used to divert attention from the failings of the Government in relation to aid.
§ Mr. Lennox-BoydI never said that population was the overall problem. As I have said, we have a very large aid budget, which has been growing substantially in the past five years. It is 3 per cent. larger this year than last and it is certainly of a significant size.
§ Mr. Anthony CoombsRecognising that the United Kingdom's aid budget is indeed large, will my hon. Friend confirm that it is the sixth largest budget in the world? Will he also confirm that there is a spurious intellectual quality about the 0.7 per cent. target that the United Nations seems to want to foist on us? Finally, does he agree that what is important is not only how much is spent on aid but how much gets to the people who need it?
§ Mr. Lennox-BoydYes, I can confirm that ours is the sixth largest programme in the world, and it is extremely 647 well targeted. The quality of our aid is recognised internationally—especially the fact that it helps the very poorest people in the world.
§ Mr. Campbell-SavoursHow can the Minister say that it is an enormous budget when it has been cut by half in the past 13 years? It is not the sixth largest in the world; it is the 14th largest when calculated as a proportion of GDP.
Do the Government intend to revise their ODA spending plans, as published in the public expenditure White Paper? Will the Minister revise those figures for the next three years as a result of Rio?
§ Mr. Lennox-BoydI can see that the hon. Gentleman supplied the information on which the Leader of the Opposition based his remark the other day that the aid programme had been cut in half since 1979. Nothing could be further from the truth. The hon. Gentleman should help his right hon. Friend better than that. Since 1979 the size of the aid budget has more than doubled in nominal terms.
§ Mr. John MarshallWill my hon. Friend remind the third world and the aid lobby that the most effective way to sponsor economic development in the third world is to encourage private investment and the adoption of a social market economy?
§ Mr. Lennox-BoydYes, my hon. Friend is right to emphasise private investment and the adoption of a social market economy. As he knows, much of our aid is targeted on countries that adopt good government practices, which include the adoption of sensible financial policies which lead to economic prosperity and growth.
§ Mr. Simon HughesThe Minister and the Prime Minister reaffirmed at Rio our commitment to 0.7 per cent., and now we have had a further clear statement of that target, but shall we ever be given a statement of the timetable for achieving it? Or shall we continue giving less than half the figure that we have accepted as the minimum that we should commit to countries far less well off than our own?
§ Mr. Lennox-BoydAs the hon. Gentleman said, the Government reaffirmed our commitment to the United Nations aid target. The important thing is to make progress as the economy grows. In the past five years, the aid budget has grown by 8 per cent. in real terms. In other words, the budget has grown in periods of growth, and this year it is 3 per cent. higher than last.
§ Mr. WattsWill my hon. Friend undertake to review our aid programme to India in the light of the good government criteria in view of that country's appalling human rights record in Kashmir and the Punjab?
§ Mr. Lennox-BoydAs my hon. Friend knows, the Indians have enormous problems with terrorism in the Punjab and Kashmir. All terrorist matters must be properly dealt with. There have been abuses in India, but we have taken them up with the Indian Government and I am happy to say that they have announced the appointment of a human rights commission, which we have welcomed. We want progress on that to attend to these difficult matters.