Overseas Aid for 1985–86 (Hansard, 3 December 1984)

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

§ Baroness Young
My Lords, my right honourable and learned friend the Secretary of State for Foreign 1111 and Commonwealth Affairs confirmed in another place on 22nd November that the provision for overseas aid for 1985–86 would remain unchanged at the previously planned and published figure of £1,130 million.

§ Lord Hatch of Lusby
My Lords, will the noble Baroness tell the House whether the figure that she has quoted from her right honourable and learned friend indicates a reduction in real resources in the aid budget for next year? If that is the case, can she tell the House whether she agrees with her former Government colleagues, led by Mr. Heath and Mr. Pym, who have stated that in their view overseas aid should be increased next year both in the interests of industry in this country and in the interests of humanitarianism, in view of the growing famine spreading through much of the world and particularly through the continent of Africa?

§ Baroness Young
My Lords, the aid programme for the year involves a cash increase of 2.8 per cent. over 1984–85. Over the three years to 1985–86, overseas aid will have increased in cost terms. On the second point the noble Lord made, the Government believe that in the present circumstances what they have achieved involves a very fair amount of money.

§ Lord Hatch of Lusby
My Lords, would the noble Baroness be so kind as to answer my first question directly? Does the figure she has given the House indicate a reduction in real resources due to the impact of inflation?

§ Baroness Young
My Lords, I thought I had answered the noble Lord. Between 1982–83 and 1985–86 aid will have increased in cost terms.

A noble Lord
In real terms, my Lords?

§ Baroness Young
My Lords, the term "cost terms" is what was often referred to as "real terms".

§ Lord Hunt of Tanworth
My Lords, is the Minister aware—and I speak as chairman of the Disasters Emergency Committee—that five British charities (Oxfam, the Red Cross, Save the Children, Christian Aid and CAFOD) have raised over £20 million for Ethiopian relief since July? If that is an indication of what the ordinary British voter thinks, would the Government bear it in mind, not only in deciding their own contribution, but in seeing that what goes to emergency relief is not at the expense of longer-term development?

§ Baroness Young
My Lords, the Government recognise the very real and important contribution that charities have made to emergency relief. I am glad to confirm that so far during this financial year Britain has contributed approximately £60 million in emergency assistance to sub-Saharan Africa, including our share of Community aid. Since October 1982, we have contributed £21.8 million in emergency assistance to Ethiopia.

§ Lord Soper
My Lords, is the Minister aware of the unanimity of opinion, indeed the conviction, among 1112 the Churches that the allocation is not enough? Is not this represented by the phenomenal voluntary gifts that have already been made? May I ask, where unanimity prevails among Christian Churches, should not this fact be regarded as being of almost awesome importance?

§ Baroness Young
My Lords, it is a recognition of the understanding that the British people have for those who are suffering so much from drought in sub-Saharan Africa that these very large sums of money have been raised. The Government recognise how valuable is this contribution and what it indicates about the view of the British public. As I have already indicated, the Government have themselves made a major contribution to relieving the distress caused by the drought in Africa.

§ Lord Orr-Ewing
My Lords, is my noble friend aware that it will give much satisfaction that in real terms aid of this nature is going up? But is it not disturbing that the bilateral aid, as a proportion of the whole, is falling while multilateral aid has doubled since this Government came to power? Ought this not now to be working in the opposite direction, as it is in so many other nations which also advocate and give aid of this sort?

§ Baroness Young
My Lords, I note what my noble friend says. All new multilateral commitments are looked at critically and on their merits, and we must of course be concerned about the effectiveness of the agencies to which we give money. But I should like to assure my noble friend that we value the substantial bilateral aid programme, which is in fact larger than the multilateral aid programme, as part of the wider political relations with friendly developing countries.

Lord Oram
My Lords, does the Minister not realise that, however she presents these figures, she cannot avoid the fact that year by year under a Labour Government the aid programme increased, whereas year by year under this Government the aid programme has decreased? Is she aware that we face a further reduction in real terms in the coming year? Will she therefore admit to the House that all the efforts of the charities to which the noble Lord, Lord Hunt, has referred, in collecting funds from a generous British public over the last year are to be cancelled out by a cut in the real value of official aid?

§ Baroness Young
My Lords, I would not accept what the noble Lord, Lord Oram, says. If he looks at the figures he will see that the amount of aid as a percentage of GNP in 1979 was said to be 0.52 per cent.; but that does not reflect the level of aid expenditure in that year. In actual aid spending terms the figure was about 0.44 per cent.
On the other point the noble Lord made, I would not accept that the fact that the charities have raised this money means that the Government could or would give less. It is a very welcome sign of the generosity of the British public, to which I have already paid tribute, and, as I have indicated, the Government take very seriously the suffering in sub-Saharan Africa and they have already given very large amounts of money in aid.

Lord Morris
My Lords, may I ask my noble friend why it is that when Governments of whatever colour wish to spend taxpayers' money, they invariably refer to it as Government money, yet when they do not want to spend taxpayers' money they call it taxpayers' money?

§ Baroness Young
My Lords, I think that that is rather wide of the Question on the Order paper. What is undoubtedly true is that it is very important that the Government should get the economy right so that we have, should we wish, more money for a great many desirable objectives. That has been the underlying purpose of their economic policies.

Lord Paget of Northampton
My Lords, does the noble Baroness agree that it is a great deal easier to discover what happens to duty-free sales than it is to find out what happens to aid paid into Africa?

§ Baroness Young
My Lords, I do not think that I should like to make that particular comparison, but on the expenditure of aid money, as with all other public money, the Government try to ensure that the money goes to the purposes for which Parliament ask for it.

§ Lord Avebury
My Lords, did the Minister not say that for this year aid was increased in cash terms by 2.8 per cent. compared with last year.

Noble Lords
Cost terms!

§ Lord Avebury
In cash terms, not cost terms. Does this not mean, in view of the fact that inflation is proceeding at a higher rate than 2.8 per cent., that the amount of goods and services which can be bought out of this aid budget is less than it was in 1983, and this in a year when the needs of the developing countries are more desperate than ever?

§ Baroness Young
My Lords, what I said was that aid this year shows a cash increase of 2.8 per cent. over 1984–85. I said that over the three years from 1982–83 to 1985–86 it will have increased in cost terms.

Lord Brock way
My Lords, may I ask the Minister whether she agrees that the first duty of a Government is to save life and provide opportunities for human fulfilment? In view of the fact that estimates vary from 19 million to 30 million people in the world dying every year from hunger, is it not the duty of the Government to increase rather than, in real terms, to decrease the aid that is given?

§ Baroness Young
My Lords, I think we could debate for a very long time what is the first duty of a Government, but I would not, I am afraid, accept the definition given by the noble Lord, Lord Brockway. The British Government are, in present circumstances, maintaining the level of aid as was set out in the public expenditure White Paper. We could argue about whether it should be a great deal more, but, as I have already indicated, in present circumstances we believe that this a very fair result 1114 after the public expenditure survey. We believe that, ultimately it is important for the economy of the country to be got right, so that we shall have, if we so wish, larger amounts of money to allocate to aid and a good many other desirable objects.

§ Lord Thorneycroft
My Lords, is the noble Baroness aware that there are many people in this country who are beginning to resent the constant attempt to decry the aid which is being given from this country to these unfortunate people, and that there are millions of people in the world who have every reason to be deeply grateful, both to the charities referred to from the Cross-Benches and to the British Government, for the efforts that they are making in these distressing circumstances?

§ Baroness Young
My Lords, I should like to thank my noble friend Lord Thorneycroft for his intervention, and to say that I entirely agree with it.

§ Lord Hatch of Lusby
My Lords, however the noble Baroness may use the figures, according to her own figures in the last year of the last Labour Government 0.44 per cent. of GNP was spent on overseas aid. She did not tell the House what was the percentage of GNP spent by the present Government this year. Is it not the case that that was around 0.3 per cent., substantiating the point made by my noble friend Lord Oram, that there has been a very substantial decrease in aid since this Government came into office? May I refer her—

Noble Lords
Question!

§ Lord Hatch of Lusby
—to my original question? Does she agree with her former Government colleagues that increased aid, far from diminishing our economic resources, would increase them and help to solve the present economic crisis in this country as well as abroad?

§ Baroness Young
My Lords, I would accept that aid has fallen as a percentage of GNP, but may I say, so far as the United Kingdom's performance is concerned, that of the major aid donors we are ahead of the United States, Japan and Italy, although I accept below France and Germany. In absolute terms we have the fifth largest programme, and within the European Community the third largest programme, to which we contribute approximately 20 per cent. On the other point about trade, of course the Government believe in world economic recovery, and we also believe that growth in international trade would be helpful both to ourselves and to the developing countries.