The Global Environmental Facility (Hansard, 20 July 1998)

§ Lord Whitty
My Lords, we are satisfied with the general progress of the Global Environmental Facility so far and strongly supported its recent replenishment and related actions to improve its work. It has to be recognised that the GEF has a particular role—to help developing countries and countries in transition play their part in global environmental issues such as climate change and the loss of biodiversity. It does not seek to address national environmental issues. That is why our contributions to the GEF are separate from our development assistance which focuses on the national development priorities of poorer countries.

§ Lord Jenkin of Roding
My Lords, is the Minister aware that an independent report produced by 25 independent consultants, which was considered at the Delhi conference in April, made some fairly strong criticisms of the way the facility is being run and suggested that some projects have been misconceived and misdirected? Is he further aware that the report suggested and the conference accepted that GEF activities should be based much more on national priorities and that the facility should promote genuine country ownership of projects and should incorporate consultation with local communities and the involvement of NGOs? Does the Minister accept that those are serious criticisms? Will the Government use their influence to try to persuade the facility that it should move in that direction?

§ Lord Whitty
My Lords, we are well aware of that report. The council considered both the independent report and the report from the agencies—the World Bank and so on—which carry out the Global Environmental Facility. They indicated that there were problems in some of the projects undertaken under GEF auspices. On the biodiversity projects, one figure suggested that roughly 12 per cent. were unsatisfactory. Of course, put another way, that means that 88 per cent. were progressing satisfactorily. We take these criticisms seriously but we have to recognise that the role of the GEF is incremental, directed at global environmental concerns. Some of the criticism—certainly the press criticism—has failed to recognise that difference.

§ Lord Kennet
My Lords, does the Minister agree that there is no necessary link between the two prongs of the 581 noble Lord's supplementary question? Would it not be perfectly possible for the GEF to continue to direct itself to global concerns, which it was set up to do, and yet at the same time to listen a little better and to listen a little lower down the heap on each specific project in each specific country?

§ Lord Whitty
Yes, my Lords, some of the recommendations of the two reports to which I referred are in that direction. The council has accepted many of those recommendations. An action plan is now being drawn up which will be considered for full implementation in the autumn.

§ Lord Beaumont of Whitley
My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that the 12 per cent. figure which he quoted of unsatisfactory projects comes from the internal report and that much more dissatisfaction is being expressed by people looking on from outside? With regard to the final question asked by the noble Lord, Lord Jenkin, will the Minister say how the Government propose more thoroughly to involve NGOs so that they can use their expertise more directly?

§ Lord Whitty
My Lords, the recommendations to which I referred in response to my noble friend Lord Kennet involve closer co-operation lower down the line, including with NGOs, which are already making an important contribution on many of the GEF projects. With regard to the criticism, there was an independent report and an internal report, both of which pointed to some deficiencies. However, some of that criticism—certainly some of the criticism which followed in the press—is due to a misunderstanding of the role of the GEF itself.

Lord Campbell of Croy
My Lords, in his first reply the noble Lord appeared satisfied with the progress made since the noble Baroness, Lady Symons, replied to my questions on this subject a year ago. However, does he sympathise with the dissatisfaction expressed by some of the developing countries concerned, in particular that the individual interests of countries do not appear to be taken fully into account?

§ Lord Whitty
My Lords, in part I sympathise with that and in part the action taken will be in order to involve developing countries to a greater extent and, indeed, down the line to local communities. However, some of the criticism is because of a misunderstanding of the role of the GEF and what it is there to fund.

§ Lord Nathan
My Lords, can the Minister advise us as to whether he is satisfied with the extent of the Government's influence over the policy of the Global Environment Facility and how they exercise that influence?

§ Lord Whitty
My Lords, the British Government are one of the 30 or so members of the council of the GEF. We are satisfied that we have strong influence. We 582 accept that some of our expertise could be brought to bear on some of the criticisms that have been voiced in these reports; and we shall do so.

Lord Lucas
My Lords, does the noble Lord agree that one of the lessons to be drawn from some of the projects which have not done so well is the importance of doing the science beforehand so that one can accurately determine what should be done and measure what has been achieved afterwards? Could not this lesson apply equally to the DfID, which is presently reducing rather than increasing its spending on science, on global positioning and on other such data?

§ Lord Whitty
My Lords, I think that that criticism applied to a few of the projects that were conducted under GEF auspices. I do not accept that that in any way cuts across the priorities which the DfID has enunciated in its White Paper and which have received general support in development agencies both here and in developing countries.

§ Lord Jenkin of Roding
My Lords, in view of the criticisms that have been directed at the facility from all parts of the House, I hope that the noble Lord may perhaps reflect on his initial Answer in which he declared himself satisfied with the work and recognise that there are indeed shortcomings here which need to be addressed.

§ Lord Whitty
My Lords, I thought that both in my first Answer and in my subsequent answers I indicated that I was very satisfied with the general progress of the GEF but that there were serious concerns which needed to be addressed. If anything, it shows that the monitoring process of the GEF and of the agencies is working in that it throws up these difficulties. We are determined, through the council and directly, to ensure that these shortcomings are addressed.