HL Deb 08 May 1991 vol 528 cc1120-9

5.3 p.m.

The Earl of Caithness

My Lords, with the leave of the House, I shall now repeat a Statement on Bangladesh made in another place by my right honourable friend the Minister for Overseas Development. The Statement is as follows:

"The cyclone which struck Bangladesh on the night of 29th to 30th April was one of the most serious disasters in the region's history. Eye witness accounts have underlined the scale of the tragedy. The whole House shares in our grief and sympathy for the Bangladeshi people.

"Precise assessments have been hindered by the severe damage to communications caused by the cyclone and by continuing bad weather. Neither international donors nor the Bangladesh Government waited for information before starting relief operations. On 30th April we authorised our High Commissioner in Dhaka to spend up to£250,000 on immediate relief needs. This formed part of the£2.5 million initial contribution announced in the House on 2nd May by my honourable friend the Member for Morecambe and Lunesdale. On 3rd May I announced a further£2 million, bringing our total support for immediate disaster relief to£4.5 million.

"A major relief effort is now well under way. Fifteen bilateral donors have offered assistance as well as some international organisations. The British response is one of the first and largest. The physical difficulties involved are massive. Severe damage extends over an area the size of that part of England, south of a line drawn between London and Bristol. Much of it still remains under water. Up to 15 million people may have been affected.

"The port of Chittagong and its equipment has been severely damaged. Rough seas continue to limit access to the islands, which are hardest hit.

"The international relief effort must be co-ordinated and duplication avoided wherever possible. At the request of the Government of Bangladesh the UNDP is acting as co-ordinator of the relief programmes of the international donor community. To assist in this task we are meeting the costs of two UN disaster relief staff.

"British experience with previous disasters in Bangladesh, like the major floods of 1987 and 1988, is that non-governmental organisations, working with the support of the Government of Bangladesh, can operate very effectively providing relief. In the immediate aftermath of the cyclone the priority has been to move stocks of food, clothing, medicines and shelter already in the country to the disaster zone, and to ensure adequate supplies of clean drinking water.

"Of the £3.3 million of bilateral assistance announced last week, some £2.5 million is already being, spent through a number of British NGOs and international agencies on food, shelter, clothing and medicines. A further £50,000 has been allocated for urgent medical supplies and water purification tablets, recommended by our medical adviser based in Dhaka. Staff from our irrigation project have already gone to assist local and British NGCs, who, together with UNICEF, are working to secure cleaner water in the affected areas. Our aid vehicles have also been made available to transport urgently needed supplies.

"We have established an emergency office in Chittagong that is providing on the spot assessments. This will promote co-ordination with other agencies and government officials. It is staffed by a highly experienced British aid official who undertook similar work during the 1988 floods.

"Some honourable Members have asked why we have not sent boats and helicopters. Our High Commissioner in Dhaka is in constant touch with the Bangladesh authorities and other donors. He advises us daily on the most effective uses to which our money can be put, taking into account what is being provided by others. We have just heard that large numbers of boats, including at least 100 collapsible boats provided by Japan following the 1988 foods, are available in Bangladesh. There are also 100 RNLI boats donated by Britain in 1988 being used by the Bangladesh Red Crescent. The High Commissioner does not recommend provision of further boats from the UK. Six Bangladesh navy ships are engaged in getting supplies to off-shore islands. Relief goods are also being transported to Chittagong by rail.

"Helicopters clearly have an important part to play as long as large areas remain inaccessible to surface transport. In the first instance this need can most effectively be met by countries within the region. India and Pakistan have already provided some helicopters, and I hope that other neighbouring countries may do likewise.

"We are playing a full part in addressing Bangladesh's immediate relief needs as they become known. The co-ordination machinery is in place in Dhaka to try to ensure that all efforts are used to maximum effect and with the minimum duplication. I met the High Commissioner of Bangladesh in London yesterday to discuss priorities.

"I am pleased to announce that we are making available a further £2 million. That brings our total contribution to £6.5 million. The £2 million will cover requests from NGOs for further priority relief supplies and the cost of sending the Royal Fleet Auxiliary ship, "Fort Grange", equipped with medical facilities and disaster relief stores and two Sea King helicopters to assist with relief operations.

"In the longer term, we have to accept that it will never be possible to protect Bangladesh totally against floods and cyclones. But certain things can be done to mitigate the effects of such natural disasters. The international community is already helping Bangladesh to develop its flood action plan, which includes further measures for cyclone protection. Other rehabilitation and reconstruction needs will be considered once the immediate relief requirements have been met."

My Lords, that concludes the Statement.

Baroness Ewart-Biggs

My Lords, we are grateful to the Minister for having repeated the Statement. I am afraid that the situation described must represent one of the most sombre pronouncements that the noble Earl has ever made. The tragedy which has once again hit that country has shaken the world and immense numbers of defenceless people are suffering.

We are pleased that the Government have increased the amount of aid that they have pledged from a lower sum to the £6.5 million which the noble Earl mentioned. Britain was the first to contribute and, as he said, is the largest contributor; a fact that we appreciate. We wish to ask a few questions about the effectiveness of the aid we are giving and whether the noble Earl believes that it is relevant to the needs of the Bangladeshi people, both in the short and the long term.

Can the Minister tell me the latest estimates for emergency aid requested by the Bangladeshi Government? Can he indicate the level of international aid pledged to date, or at least the figure pledged by the EC countries? Further, the very nature of the disaster means that a vast amount of land is still under water with pockets of people stranded without assistance. There is an obvious need for boats and helicopters. I am still a little anxious about the number of boats available. Although the noble Earl made clear that already there is a large number of boats, he produced no figures on how many have been given to assist in the emergency operations. He says that the High Commissioner does not recommend the provision of further boats from the United Kingdom. I should be grateful if he could explain what that means.

Clearly helicopters have an important part to play. The noble Earl said that India and Pakistan have provided helicopters, but my information is that only six helicopters are operating in the area. Will the noble Earl be good enough to say how many helicopters are operating? The need for them is immense while the flood waters still exist.

I should particularly like to know about the movement of supplies. I found out today that UNICEF is supplying £5 million—30 tonnes—of medical supplies, vaccines, ORS and cold boxes from Copenhagen. I know that supplies are being moved from Chittagong. Can the noble Earl tell us the state of the railways and whether he feels that such supplies are getting through? If not, the need for more boats and helicopters is imperative.

Can the noble Earl outline the form which British emergency aid to Bangladesh will take during the next weeks? He will agree that Bangladesh is one of the poorest countries on earth and least able to cope with such a disaster. I know that the ODA provides what I consider must be the most useful form of aid—Bailey bridges—which can be used both now and at the beginning of any future disasters that may occur. Can the Minister say whether we shall be providing this kind of aid because Bailey bridges are part of the aid project?

I have two questions on the longer term. First, I believe that not long ago the EC carried out a study on cyclone protection in Bangladesh. I should be interested to know what recommendations were made and whether any have been taken up and put into effect.

Although my last question is not directly related to the Statement today, nevertheless it is highly relevant. A concert is being organised this weekend by Mr. Jeffrey Archer which has been highly publicised. In a rather unprecedented way, the Government are contributing a large sum of money to it. I do not argue the rights or wrongs of that, but since the Government are contributing to it, in aid of the Kurdish people, perhaps they will be able to influence the transfer of some of the funds to this new and utterly tragic disaster which has hit the Bangladeshi people. I should be grateful if the noble Earl could respond to the points I have made.

Lord Bonham-Carter

My Lords, I wish to associate myself with the words of the noble Baroness and thank the noble Earl for repeating the Statement made in another place by his right honourable friend. None of us can adequately express our horror at this gigantic disaster—gigantic in scale both in the geographical area devastated and the number of people involved. No words can describe it and therefore only by deeds can we express our sorrow at events. I congratulate the noble Earl's right honourable friend on the speed and appropriateness of the aid which has already been delivered.

I wish to know more about the flood action programme to which the Statement refers. There are two aspects to the disaster. First, there are the short-term remedies which can be supplied, to which I shall return. Secondly, in the long run clearly there must be a programme to prevent such disasters—if not wholly, it is important at least to mitigate their consequences. For that Bangladesh will require international assistance. Any information that the Minister can give the House on the flood action programme will be welcome.

I was interested in the comment on the adequacy of the supply of boats. I can only hope that it is correct. Like the noble Baroness, I feel from the depths of my ignorance that probably what is most needed is helicopters. I was informed that there are currently nine in Bangladesh. Perhaps the Minister will let us know how many there are. We have supplied two, but are those additional or included in the nine? Perhaps we should try to increase the number of helicopters, sending them out now so that they can be used when the weather improves.

The historic links which bind this country to Bangladesh are such that it is quite right that the country should take the lead in supplying aid. I understand that we have so far given?6.5 million, which is more than most countries, as is right and proper. We should bear in mind that we are still only spending 0.3 per cent. of our GDP on this kind of aid and the target is 0.7 per cent. Quite a number of countries are closer to that target than we are. Therefore, we can and should afford to continue the generous policy on which we are set. I look forward to hearing the noble Earl's answers.

The Earl of Caithness

My Lords, I am grateful for the welcome that the noble Baroness and the noble Lord, Lord Bonham-Carter, gave to the Statement. I wish to join them again in conveying our sincere condolences to Bangladesh and our horror at what has happened.

I wish first to deal with the point on boats raised by both the noble Baroness and the noble Lord. I said when reading out the Statement that there were 100 RNLI boats, but the Statement which the Front Benches opposite received refers to 10 RNLI boats. The latter is the correct figure. The figure I gave was wrong and I apologise sincerely to the House for making such an error.

We believe that there are enough boats in the area. We must not forget that Bangladesh is a low lying country and therefore has a lot of boats of its own. However, some boats are in the wrong place. It is a matter of getting the available boats to the area where they are needed. It is wrong for us in Whitehall to second-guess what is happening on the spot when our advice from our High Commissioner on the spot is that British aid can best be used elsewhere. It would be wrong in the immediate circumstances of the aftermath of the disaster to overrule the High Commissioner. I believe our aid is being used effectively.

That brings me to the point about helicopters. I understand that Bangladesh has about four helicopters of its own. India has supplied three helicopters and Pakistan has supplied two. That makes the total of nine that the noble Lord, Lord Bonham-Carter, referred to. I also mentioned the two helicopters that were on the Royal Fleet Auxiliary ship. We hope that other countries in the region will be able to contribute helicopters. I am sure everyone would agree that it is much quicker to bring a helicopter from a neighbouring country to the disaster zone than try to bring in helicopters from further away.

The noble Baroness asked about the contributions of other states. I hope I may write to her on that point. I have many figures, but they seem to be changing by the hoar. Therefore whatever I say now will quickly be out of date. The latest figures I have apply to the situation yesterday. At that stage the EC had committed 10 million ecu—that is about £6.968 million—and about 15 countries have contributed either money or relief supplies. Saudi Arabia has promised sums for longer term rehabilitation aid.

As regards whether supplies are getting through, we understand that the railway to Chittagong is open. We can consider constructing Bailey bridges. However, our first priority in aid is food, clothing, medicines and shelter. I should say a few words about the flood action plan to which both the noble Baroness and the noble Lord, Lord Bonham-Carter, referred. There are two types of flood action plan. There is the plan financed by the EC which is due to be completed later this year. The present indications are that it would recommend a series of structural solutions. Clearly a consultant's further assessment will be particularly valuable in the light of recent events. In addition, we are carrying out four flood action plan assessments. One is to assess the flood control and drainage options in order to reduce and manage flooding in the north-west region. The second consists of a review of existing flood control projects in relation to agricultural, economic, social and environmental impacts to provide guidelines for regional studies. The aim of the third plan is to recommend operation and maintenance procedures for flood action plan projects including the fullest participation by beneficiary and disadvantaged groups. The fourth plan consists of a fisheries study to identify ways of minimising negative impacts of flood action plan protection on flood plain fisheries and fishing communities.

5.25 p.m.

Lord Boyd-Carpenter

My Lords, will my noble friend clarify the number of aircraft that have been sent from this country to help the situation in Bangladesh? I understood him to say there were two aircraft on a ship, but are there any others? Is he satisfied that the total number of aircraft, both fixed wing and helicopters, that we are providing, is adequate? In view of the great efficiency with which the RAF operates in these situations, will my noble friend consider—unless he can say that a fairly substantial number of aircraft have been sent—giving an under -taking that the Government will consider sending more aircraft?

In assessing the total amount of aid which we can give in this case as compared with the other demands upon us from the other disaster areas of the world, will my noble friend bear in mind two factors: first, that we have a long historical connection with Bangladesh—as far as I recall, we do not have such a connection with any of the other disaster areas in the world today—and, secondly, that whereas in the other disaster areas of the world a good deal of the trouble has been caused by the mismanagement, oppression and misconduct of governments, in the case of Bangladesh the Bangladeshi Government are wholly innocent of any contributory factor to the disaster? This is a straight case of a natural disaster affecting a wholly innocent government and people.

The Earl of Caithness

My Lords, I agree with the point my noble friend made about Britain's historical connections with Bangladesh and the natural characteristics of the disaster. Low lying countries such as Bangladesh are threatened by significant rises in sea level. Although the western world has had something to do with the rises in sea level, this has been a natural disaster of huge proportions.

As regards my noble friend's question about aircraft, we have not sent any fixed wing aircraft to Bangladesh. The main priority is the movement of goods in that country by road, rail and boat. Our High Commission has recommended that we should not send fixed wing aircraft to Bangladesh.

Lord Boyd-Carpenter

My Lords, how many helicopters are there?

The Earl of Caithness

My Lords, I believe I answered that point in reply to the noble Lord, Lord Bonham-Carter. There are nine in Bangladesh at the moment. We shall contribute a further two helicopters when the Royal Fleet Auxiliary ship reaches Bangladesh.

Lord Hatch of Lusby

My Lords, does the Minister agree that the scale of this disaster is largely due to the poverty of the people who have been stricken? The people in the coastal areas, and particularly on the silt islands which have suffered most, went to those areas to seek relief from their poverty. In moving from the interior to the coastal lands, they became particularly vulnerable to such disasters. In view of that fact will the Minister not address himself to the point made by the noble Lord, Lord Bonham-Carter, that our general aid programme today has fallen from more than 0.5 per cent. of GNP to 0.3 per cent. of GNP during the past decade?

Further, will the Minister address himself to the matter of shelters on the coastal lands? I understand that the people who survived this horrible disaster were those who managed to get into shelters. However, I also understand that about 5,000 of these shelters are required to protect people in an area where there are bound to be a series—according to all the climatic forecasts—of tidal floods and rises in sea level. I understand that the shelters cost about£40,000 each to build. Will the British Government and their EC partners co-operate in ensuring that after this disaster has receded an immediate building programme will be started to construct more shelters which could save tens and perhaps hundreds of thousands of lives in the years ahead?

I was particularly interested to hear the noble Earl refer to the internal provision of foodstuffs and to the necessary safeguards for the people who are now stricken by this disaster. Is it not the case that there is a great deal of food in other areas of Bangladesh and that the main challenge as regards food supplies is to find the machines which can transfer food from the interior to the stricken islands? Does that not reinforce the need to use as many helicopters as possible—whole fleets of helicopters—simply to prevent the people on the coastline from starving?

The Earl of Caithness

My Lords, the noble Lord began by asking what were the causes of the terrible tragedy. I repeat that we shall never be able to protect Bangladesh totally from floods and cyclones. However, certain things can be done, and were done by the Bangladesh authorities on this occasion, in relation to early warning and the movement of people to shelter. Clearly those actions were inadequate and all concerned will want to consider how to improve matters in the future. It is fair to say that some people did not move out of the cyclone's path, despite being encouraged to do so by the Bangladesh Government, because they were unwilling to do so. That is an example of the tremendous pressure on land and crops.

Regarding aid, Bangladesh is currently our third largest bilateral aid programme, receiving about £50 million annually. In addition, the share of aid to Bangladesh from multilateral institutions attributable to the UK amounted to £28.8 million in 1988, which is the last year for which a figure is available.

On the question of shelters, the noble Lord raised an important point. That matter will be looked into by the donors once the Community study is complete, which I said would be towards the end of the year.

5.30 p.m.

Baroness Strange

My Lords, I should like to add a few words to what has been said about Bangladesh, having been the only Member of this House in the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association group which visited Bangladesh last November. As my noble friend said, Bangladesh suffers from overpopulation and a terrible propensity to natural disasters. When we were there in November Bangladesh was in the middle of a coup—or a change of government, whichever way one wants to put it. There was an indefinite curfew. We had armed sentries outside our bedroom doors at night. All of the various aid agencies left our hotel while we were there. The other members of our party heard shots and troop movements at night. I did not—my room faced the swimming pool and I slept soundly. I should especially like to emphasise the charm and friendliness of the people despite all that activity.

We visited many aid projects—villages, agricultural projects, a fish farm and a tea plantation. We visited some in helicopters—probably some of the six—and some by road. They were definitely basic agricultural roads, and there were not many. We also flew to Chittagong and in a helicopter flew over the area which is now devastated. Even when it was not devastated we seemed to be flying over sea, with water all around.

I even had a chance to hold some of the babies in the hill villages. They were sweet. Travelling out to Bangladesh my suitcase was weighed down with pounds of wrapped boiled sweets, which I gave to as many children as I could. The smiles on their faces at the small, unaccustomed luxury were heart-tugging. I cannot bear to think of their terrible deprivation now as they face death from famine and disease.

Everyone wants aid from us. Everyone thinks that because we can purchase not only the necessities of life such as bread and clean water but also the luxuries like boiled sweets we are unimaginably rich. Sadly, we are not a bottomless pit. We cannot give all that we should like to everyone. However, the Bangladeshis have a special call on us. Their ties with the British Empire and the Commonwealth are very strong. What is sometimes rare, they all like us. They are all grateful for anything we can do. I thank my noble friend very much for what he has said.

I should also like to say that I have met the High Commissioner, Mr. Colin Imray. I believe that anything that he recommends will be right because he has a very good grasp of the situation, as does his wife. I thank my noble friend for what he has said.

The Earl of Caithness

My Lords, it has been most helpful that my noble friend has been able to recount her visit at first hand. It only serves to underline the disaster. It is all the more poignant as a result of her visit.

Lord Elton

My Lords, does my noble friend agree that the recent chapter of international disasters is beginning to show certain basic similarities and that there are lessons to be learnt? Is it not the case that the appropriateness of aid in the first instance depends on information, namely, reconnaissance in the area in which the disaster has taken place; secondly, that its effectiveness is directly proportional in the early days to the speed with which it is delivered; and thirdly, that in those early days it is air and not water or land transport which is most effective, and since landing facilities are not normally available it is helicopters and not fixed wing aircraft which are appropriate? Have we not seen television film of refugees being bombed, sometimes fatally, with food from fixed wing aircraft? Have we not recently seen television film of packages of food—rice or bread—being dropped into contaminated water from fixed wing aircraft?

Does it not follow that for the future we should be prepared to supply helicopter transportation to areas of natural disaster immediately on call? Is there not a role for the military in both reconnaissance and transport which should be reviewed by NATO when considering its future role in out-of-area operations? I hope that the Government will consider again the ground they considered five years ago and the building of treaty relationships with countries likely to be affected so that unarmed troops equipped with appropriate reconnaissance and transport equipment can be taken, like a fire brigade, from the secure and wealthy part of the world in which we live to the impoverished and endangered parts of the world we are speaking of?

The Earl of Caithness

My Lords, there are certainly similarities in the results of some of the tragedies that we have witnessed, although the tragedies have been caused by a variety of events. The current disaster is very much a natural one.

My noble friend has underlined two important points One is that in order for aid to be used to maxim, urn effect the speed with which it is delivered is important. I do not necessarily agree with him that the means that he proposed for delivering aid is the right one. It very much depends on the circumstances. Boats are the important means of communication and of delivering aid in this particular case.

In relation to his second point, reconnaissance of the area affected is very important so that targets can be pinpointed and the aid can be provided as quickly as possible.

Lord Hatch of Lusby

My Lords, the noble Earl did not answer two of the questions which I put to him. First, does he consider that this disaster, together with the threats to the Kurds and to the even larger number of Africans (27 million), has jerked the Government out of I heir complacency with their aid programme so as to increase the miserable 0.3 per cent. of GNP which they are at present providing in order that the poverty which is the basic cause of this disaster can be tackled and we can play our part in it, as the noble Lord, Lord Bonham-Carter, said? Secondly, does he agree that the major challenge in Bangladesh today is to move food from one part of the country to another? Is not the most efficient way of doing that with helicopters? Despite what he has said, is it not possible for Her Majesty's Government to provide many more helicopters to move the food from one part of the country to another where people are today dying from starvation?

The Earl of Caithness

My Lords, we are not complacent about our aid programme. I did not answer the question which the noble Lord put to me earlier because he deliberately sought to widen the debate. In view of earlier proceedings in your Lordships' House I wanted to give as many other noble Lords as possible a chance to speak.

I have already answered questions about helicopters. We are taking the advice of the High Commissioner in the area. The noble Lord does not seem to realise that it is a logistic exercise to get a helicopter from here to places like Bangladesh. He will recall how long it took to get helicopters and other logistic equipment to the Gulf not so long ago.

Forward to