Overseas Aid (Hansard, 25 October 1995)

§ Baroness Chalker of Wallasey
My Lords, 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.

§ Lord Ashley of Stoke
My Lords, is the noble Baroness aware that the House is familiar with the Government's claim that our overseas aid as a proportion of GNP is just over the average for all donor countries, which makes it sound respectable? However, the OECD report expresses a different viewpoint when it states that four countries now exceed the United Nations target of 0.7 per cent. and that five countries exceed 0.35 per cent.—which is half of the target—but that there are 12 countries which do not even manage 0.35 per cent. Britain is one of those countries and that is nothing to be proud of.

§ Baroness Chalker of Wallasey
My Lords, we are 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 British NGOs, gives value for money far in excess of what some other nations may offer. I fully accept the figures that the noble Lord has given, but I believe that it makes much better sense to offer value for money within the budget we can afford than to throw money at problems as that never solves them.

§ Baroness Gardner of Parkes
My Lords, will the Minister assure us that she is well aware of the good value for money which is achieved through the money that the ODA gives through the NGOs which operate in other countries? I declare an interest as chairman of one of those fund-raising organisations. Those organisations employ the money effectively and directly in the field on their projects.

§ Baroness Chalker of Wallasey
My Lords, I am grateful to my noble friend. It is not just a matter of obtaining value for money through our bilateral programme but also improving the value for money 1110 given through multilateral programmes to which we devote much of our budget. That is most important. Whether the NGOs are working directly for us, when we have an absolutely straight influence over them, or whether they are taking resources from the European Union, British NGOs usually give the best value for money in the world.

§ Lord Judd
My Lords, as my noble friend has indicated, does not the Minister accept that it is a shameful record that the Government, despite the Minister's best endeavours, have virtually halved the proportion of our wealth devoted to overseas aid and development programmes? Will the Minister assure the House that enough is enough and that she will make absolutely clear to her colleagues that she will he in no way party to any further reduction in the proportion of our wealth that is being given to these urgent social issues overseas?

§ Baroness Chalker of Wallasey
My Lords, the answer to the first question is no; but the answer to the noble Lord's second question is a little more complex. It is not the amount that one gives but the value of that amount in the recipient countries that is important. There are many things which we used to do which, thank goodness, we no longer do. That comment is made by the recipient countries rather than myself. The noble Lord knows that, while I cannot comment on the public expenditure round, our aid is still said by the OECD and others—however much the noble Lord may decry it—to offer the best value for money in the world. I intend to keep it that way.

§ The Lord Bishop of Oxford
My Lords, as the Minister knows, a number of Bishops and Church leaders have written to Government Ministers expressing concern about rumoured cuts in the aid budget. Does the Minister know that in her battles on behalf of overseas aid she has the full support of Church leaders and, I believe, the Christian constituency in this country, and that that constituency would be appalled if there were any fall in the real value of aid? A £300 million cut, for example—only 01 per cent. of public expenditure—would have a devastating effect on the poorest countries in the world whom we are at present supporting.

§ Baroness Chalker of Wallasey
My Lords, I am most grateful to the right reverend Prelate for his comments and indeed to the Church and the non-governmental organisations for their support in our effort to make this still the most effective aid programme in the world. I just wish they would not all write to me!

§ Lord Ashley of Stoke
My Lords, is the Minister aware that I do not doubt she does—

Earl Ferrers
My Lords, I do not like to interrupt but we have spent 24 minutes on Questions so far and there is another Question to be discussed. It might be advisable if we were to move on.