§ 31. Mr. PikeTo ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what representations have been received on trends in overseas aid during the past three months. [37863]
§ The Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Mr. Jeremy Hanley)We have received a large number of representations about the level of overseas aid, a great many of them paying tribute to the quality of our programmes.
§ Mr. PikeThe Government may have given the impression that the budget faced a 12 per cent. cut so that they could introduce a smaller cut. Will the Minister recognise, however, that the public feel that overseas aid should not be reduced by a penny in real terms, but instead should be increased?
§ Mr. HanleyWe cannot prejudge the outcome of the public expenditure survey, but, whatever happens after the Budget, we shall continue to have a highly effective aid programme befitting the United Kingdom's status as a country with ties throughout the globe.
Ours is the fifth largest economy in the world, and we have the fifth largest aid programme. I believe that our £2.2 billion programme—closely targeted, and concentrating on the poorest in Africa and Asia, with the magnificent support of the British non-governmental organisations—gives value for money far in excess of what some other nations may offer.
§ Mr. LesterDoes my right hon. Friend accept that many hon. Members on both sides of the House deeply appreciate the quality of our aid programme, and its maintenance at a very satisfactory level? We are all concerned about the possibility that anyone should want to reduce it. This year's scare has been much greater than usual, and I hope that that will be taken into account.
§ Mr. HanleyAs my hon. Friend knows very well, not just the volume but the quality of British aid is at issue. That quality is extremely high. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development has recognised the programme's effectiveness—with its poverty focus and growing emphasis on encouraging the private sector—but, as I have said, we cannot prejudge the outcome of the PES. Let us wait and see.
§ Mr. Simon HughesWill the Minister confirm that, whatever the outcome of the PES, a cut in the total budget would probably mean a cut three times as great in the bilateral budget for this country's specific commitments? If there is any cut at all, the projects that will be most at risk are those to which the country is most committed.
§ Mr. HanleyI do not accept that we are "most committed" to any specific part of the aid programme; it is all extremely important to us. I accept, however, that if there is a cut in the aid budget it will have a gearing effect on our bilateral aid, because of the proportion of bilateral to multilateral aid and the changeover that is likely to occur over the next three years. I can only repeat what I said before: our £2.2 billion programme is extremely effective, and I know that many people rely on us.
§ Sir John StanleyDoes my right hon. Friend agree that the change to which he has just referred—the decline of 16 the share of our bilateral aid programme, and the increasing share going to the European Union following decisions at the Edinburgh summit—is a matter of considerable concern? At the forthcoming intergovernmental conference, will my right hon. Friend renegotiate those arrangements, and try to claw back to our national control a greater element of our available aid expenditure?
§ Mr. HanleyMultilateral aid is currently about 50 per cent. of the total aid budget, and that reflects Britain's worldwide responsibilities. We plan to retain a substantial and effective bilateral programme, but our multilateral commitments are great because of our worldwide links and interests. We are working hard to ensure that multilateral aid, particularly that distributed through the European Community, meets the highest quality standards.
§ Miss LestorIs the Minister aware of the dismay that has been felt throughout southern Africa at the Government's refusal at last month's round table conference in Brussels to pledge any new money to help to consolidate the peace process in Angola, in response to calls for investment in vital rehabilitation programmes? That was prejudging the cuts. Is the Minister aware that that refusal is viewed as a lack of political commitment to the peace process in Angola, the success of which is essential not only for war-torn Angola but for the stability of southern Africa as a whole? Will he reconsider the matter without waiting for the Budget announcement?
§ Mr. HanleyAs the hon. Lady knows, 40 per cent. of our bilateral aid in 1993–94—that is more than £363 million—went to countries in sub-Saharan Africa. We also make a substantial contribution through multilateral aid. The European Community's aid programme to sub-Saharan Africa for 1995 is equivalent to £7.6 billion, and the United Kingdom's share is £1.25 billion. As to Angola specifically, I shall pass the hon. Lady's comments on to my right hon. and noble Friend the Minister responsible.