UNICEF: Funds and Contracts (Hansard, 3 March 1983)

§ Lord Hatch of Lusby
My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, subject to parliamentary approval, the United Kingdom will contribute £6 million to UNICEF's general resources this year. It is impossible to say how much British firms will earn from UNICEF orders, but in recent years the figure has consistently been in excess of 10 million United States dollars. Such orders are placed by UNICEF, of course, on the basis of their own estimate of the best value for money.

§ Lord Hatch of Lusby
My Lords, on the second part of the noble Lord's Answer, may I ask him whether he agrees that the operation of UNICEF has over the past few years brought almost as much in trade contracts to this country as is equal to the British Government's contribution?
So far as the first part of the noble Lord's Answer is concerned, may I ask whether he is aware that the very small increase—which, according to my figures, would be only £0.1 million on the present year's budget—over the £5.9 million of this year is a great disappointment in view of the tremendous magnitude of the task which UNICEF is facing, and in view also of the fact that countries like both Norway and the Netherlands pay a great deal more towards UNICEF funds?

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, I am not quite sure whether I ought to answer the questions in the reverse order, as the noble Lord did in dealing with my first Answer. However, I can tell him that whether or not we make a profit out of this deal is in fact a happy accident. There is no planned relationship between the level of United Kingdom contribution and the amount UNICEF spends here on procurement. The latter figure depends on a number of variable factors, such as the level of United Kingdom prices and the rates of exchange between the pound and other currencies. Over the five years to 1982 UNICEF procurement in 1214 the United Kingdom totalled 71.28 million dollars, and Government contributions in the same period totalled 66.58 million dollars.
I should point out that the United Kingdom National Committee for UNICEF also raised substantial sums during that period, helped by the Churches in their collecting boxes and through other means. There will also have been a profit from the sale of UNICEF greeting cards in this country. As regards the very slight increase from year to year, over the past two years the noble Lord, Lord Hatch, is absolutely correct; but I would point out that there are other demands of at least as great merit—sometimes greater merit—in the overseas aid budget.

Lord Oram
My Lords, does the noble Lord the Minister recall that the Prime Minister recently met Mr. James Grant, the Director of UNICEF, and that she is reported to have expressed considerable enthusiasm for the work of UNICEF? In view of the figures the noble Lord has just given to the House, indicating what seems to be a decline in real terms—he was giving the figures in cash terms—will he urge upon the Prime Minister that she should match her enthusiastic words with real improvement in action?

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, I rather think she has. At the meeting with Mr. James Grant, to which the noble Lord referred, my right honourable friend the Prime Minister reaffirmed her strong support for UNICEF and said that we would maintain our contribution at a good level, as in the past. If this figure of £6 million for 1983 is approved by Parliament it will be the largest ever British contribution to UNICEF's general resources.

Lord Oram
But, my Lords, surely the figure is in cash terms, and in real terms it is a decrease?

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, I think the noble Lord is in danger of not comparing like with like. I specifically referred to UNICEF's general resources. In the past the figures have very often included special one-off projects.

§ Lord Brockway
My Lords, has the Minister noted that in the Annual Report of UNICEF the statement is made that 17 million children died from hunger or from medical neglect, and that only £5.40 each would save children by immunisation from deadly diseases? Is there a greater need in the whole world to which we should be contributing more generously than to ending this tragedy?

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, obviously, as is so often the case, there is a lot of force in what the noble Lord, Lord Brockway, says. Certainly I have noted the report; indeed, I have it in front of me. UNICEF has identified four areas of work which are vitally needed for the aid of children: These are oral rehydration therapy, the universal immunisation of children, the promotion of breast feeding, and the widespread use of infant growth charts. The Government very much approve of all these projects.

§ Lord Molloy
My Lords, would not the noble Lord agree, in so far as he has implied that from the British 1215 contributions to UNICEF there has arisen, by accident, so to speak, almost a profit for British firms concerned—this is a very tender and sensitive area of expenditure, bearing in mind that we are not expending anything but rather making a profit—that there is a very good case for Britain's contribution to be increased very considerably?

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, when I described the profit as a "happy accident" I meant exactly what I said. There is no guarantee that by spending extra money in this particular area of our aid budget we would continue to have the satisfactory procurement arrangements which have so far held in regard to UNICEF.

§ Lord Hatch of Lusby
My Lords, will the noble Lord clarify to the House the question which, at least in my mind, is still clouded by his answer to my noble friend Lord Oram? Are the figures the noble Lord has given cash figures or cost figures? In other words, do they take inflation into account? If they do, that is a reduction. I fully take the noble Lord's point, that he has read the report of UNICEF and has seen their forecast that the number of children who die each year from these causes can be halved. What is the British Government going to do to assist what must surely be one of the first priorities in our world community today?

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, to answer the second part of the noble Lord's question, we are proposing to Parliament that we should make an allocation of £6 million, which will to a large extent go into the four projects to which I referred.
With regard to the first supplementary question of the noble Lord, whether it was cash prices or inflation-proofed prices I was talking about, the answer is cash prices. But I should like to make the point again that you cannot compare figures for actual expenditure between one year and another, because there is a roll-over effect from one year to the next. You cannot make a direct comparison between one year and either the previous or the succeeding year.

§ Lord Hatch of Lusby
My Lords, so this is in fact a reduction in the amount contributed by the British Government to UNICEF in the year 1983–84?

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, it is not a reduction, because, as I said to the noble Lord, Lord Oram, in previous years the money included special projects which were one-off affairs. This year we are talking about UNICEF's general resources. They are two different things.

§ The Earl of Lauderdale
Does my noble friend acknowledge the Soviet contribution to these worthy causes?

§ Lord Skelmersdale
No, my Lords, I am afraid not. I shall write to my noble friend.

§ Lord Bishopston
My Lords, does the Minister accept that spending money to raise the living standards in the third world and other places is one 1216 way of preventing some of the tensions which often lead us to spend money on defence in a negative way, and that this form of spending is a positive way of preventing some of the problems which we have to deal with later? Does not the noble Lord think that his reply is complacent in a matter which is of great concern?

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, I am afraid I fail to see the relevance between the finances of UNICEF and the general aid budget which may or may not reflect upon the defence policy of either Her Majesty's Government or other Governments overseas. So far as my complacency goes, that is not for me to judge.

The Duke of Atholl
My Lords, could my noble friend tell us the total amount of money that goes from this country to UNICEF; that is, the Government contribution and the voluntary contributions from the Churches and other organisations?

§ Lord Skelmersdale
My Lords, the United Kingdom National Committee last year raised slightly over £300,000. I am afraid that I do not have with me last year's figure for our direct contribution to UNICEF, but I know that the noble Lord, Lord Hatch of Lusby, has already referred to it this afternoon.