§ Lord Juddasked Her Majesty's Government:
With reference to their assurance that "excessive military expenditure" is taken into account when deciding levels of aid to individual countries (H. L Deb., 17 November, col. 30), how they define "excessive" and why aid to Indonesia is increasing while aid to sub-Saharan Africa is decreasing.
§ Baroness Chalker of WallaseyIt is not feasible to operate a simple definition of when military expenditure is excessive. Account must be taken of issues such as regional security situations; budgetary pressures; and the allocation of expenditure to key development sectors. It is within this context that levels of military expenditure of aid-recipient countries are taken into account, on a case-by-case basis, when deciding upon bilateral aid programme allocations.
The rising level of multilateral aid is placing pressure on the resources available for bilateral aid, including our programmes in sub-Saharan Africa. Despite this, Africa remains a priority for British aid. In 1993–94 we spent £381 million—representing 42.5 per cent. of our bilateral aid programme allocable by region—in African countries. In addition, the European Union's aid programme to sub-Saharan Africa for the period 1990–95 amounts to the equivalent of some £7.6 thousand million, of which the UK share is £1.25 thousand million.
Our aid to Indonesia—amounting to £22 million in 1993–94—reflects the country's large population, its relative poverty, (despite an outstanding record of poverty reduction) and its sound economic management. In recent years aid to Indonesia has increased, due largely to support under the Aid and Trade Provision (ATP), for which Indonesia is eligible as a low-income creditworthy country, and to the undertaking of an enhanced programme of technical co-operation in the forestry sector, which is of high environmental importance. Indonesia's defence expenditure is under 2 per cent of its GDP.