UN Development Aid Target (Hansard, 26 November 1991)

§ Lord Cavendish of Furness
My Lords, the Government's policy has not changed. We accept the UN target in principle. However, as we have made clear, the future level of aid expenditure will continue to depend on our economic circumstances and on the many other calls on public resources. The aid programme is growing in real terms, is of high quality and well targeted.

§ Lord Cheshire
My Lords, I thank the Minister for that Answer and for the assurance, which I accept, that the programme is well targeted and well directed. However, I am sure that he will know that those of us who move in the developed and developing world, and who see the immense poverty and hardships, feel deeply about this, just as is the case with housing.
Perhaps I may ask the question that was implicit in my specific Question. Are the Government still committed to the principles which were laid down in the original UN charter and were stated again in the 1970 Resolution 2626? It stated, among other things, that the essential path to peace and justice is 1273 development—that is well understood —and cooperation between developing nations and ourselves. We should be grateful for the Minister's assurance on that.

§ Lord Cavendish of Furness
My Lords, I am pleased to acknowledge the work of the noble and gallant Lord. His concern in the matter is shared in many parts of the House. We have had no change of policy and are committed to the target, although I cannot comment on the timescale.

§ Lord Judd
My Lords, will the noble Lord give the House an assurance that with the grotesque needs now developing in East and Central Europe, any response to these will be met from the peace dividend and not at the expense of commitments to the third world? In other words, the Government will avoid the temptation to rob Peter to pay Paul.

§ Lord Cavendish of Furness
My Lords, I can assure the noble Lord that there will be no question of robbing Peter to pay Paul. With the aid programme, anything we do in Eastern Europe will not be at the expense of the rest of the programme.

§ Lord Orr-Ewing
My Lords, will my noble friend say what steps the Government are taking to make sure that these moneys go to the benefit of the pathetic figures whom we see in pictures, illustrations and appeals, and not to their rulers who are too often directly responsible for the misery of these people?

§ Lord Cavendish of Furness
My Lords, the Development Assistance Committee (the DAC) of the OECD, has repeatedly praised the quality of our aid. In direct response to my noble friend, on poverty focus, on evaluation and efficiency we rank with the best.

§ Lord Mackie of Benshie
My Lords, is the Minister aware that the Government cannot afford not to increase the aid programme, admittedly in sensible ways? I have heard answers from the noble Earl, Lord Caithness, suggesting that an increased contribution to the world population fund would be spending the people's money unnecessarily. However, is the Minister also aware that we have just announced the employment of 500 extra people in government service to deal with immigration into this country? The only real way is to educate, for example, the people of the Maghreb in birth control, to keep the population steady. At present, while the GNP is rising, the GNP per head is falling. It is a good investment to help with this kind of programme.

§ Lord Cavendish of Furness
My Lords, I am not sure whether I have been asked a question. However, I can only agree with practically everything the noble Lord has said. As regards the GNP falling, I believe there has been a misunderstanding in that regard. The figure for the calendar year 1990 of 0.27 per cent., which the noble Lord may have seen, did not reflect the underlying growth in the aid programme. The corresponding figure for 1989 was 0.31 per cent. The reason was that the UK plans and accounts by 1274 financial years and a disproportionate amount of our 1990 expenditure fell in the first quarter of 1991. There was a subsequent distortion in the figures which the noble Lord may have seen.

§ Lord Mackie of Benshie
My Lords, the noble Lord may have misunderstood my question. I hope I may put him right. What I said was that while the total GNP rose in the Maghreb, the GNP per head in that country was falling in spite of our aid and in spite of efforts made in that country.

§ Lord Cavendish of Furness
My Lords, I shall have to study the question and write to the noble Lord.

§ Lord Taylor of Gryfe
My Lords, I congratulate the Minister on the work of his department with the limited resources that are now available. Those resources were mentioned in the excellent report produced by the Minister's department. That report is available to all noble Lords who wish to study it. Does the Minister feel, however, that the aid-trade provisions which are part of the aid supplied by his department are adequate? Considering the limited resources that are available for aid trade provisions, are not our exporters placed at a substantial disadvantage compared with those in other countries that benefit from larger budgets in this field?

§ Lord Cavendish of Furness
My Lords, I am constrained for time. I should like to write to the noble Lord on his interesting and detailed point. I acknowledge and thank the noble Lord for his tribute, particularly as it affects my right honourable friend Mrs. Chalker who has made amazing efforts in this field.

§ Lord Ennals
My Lords, apart from the urgent—

Noble Lords
Order!

§ Lord Hatch of Lusby
My Lords, the noble Lord has provided an Answer to this Question which does not differ from the Answer that has been provided over the past 12 years. How does he equate his statement that the percentage of GNP given in overseas aid will rise when our economy rises with the fact that when the so-called economic miracle took place there was no rise at all in that percentage? Further, how can the Minister say that the Government still stick to the figure of 0.7 per cent. when during that 12-year period the percentage figure has fallen from 0.53 per cent. to the figure the Minister used, 0.31 percent.?

§ Lord Cavendish of Furness
My Lords, the replies given by my department have been consistent for 12 years and will continue to be consistent during the next 12 years.

§ The Lord Privy Seal (Lord Waddington)
My Lords, I must protect the interests of the noble Lord who has tabled the next Question.