House of Commons Hansard Debates for 21 Oct 1991

Mrs. Ann Clwyd (Cynon Valley) : I welcome this rare opportunity to debate an aspect of development and co-operation on the Floor of the House in Government time. Once again, the timetabling of the debate demonstrates the dismally low priority that the Government give to aid and development. These vital issues are currently treated as little more than a stopgap, or a filler, in parliamentary business. It appears that only when having run scared of a November election, and thinking that they had parliamentary time on their hands, were the Government prepared to debate these issues. Once again, their approach wholly fails to match the importance that is increasingly attached to the subject by the British people.

Be that as it may, I welcome the chance to debate this topic--particularly the European Community's programme for Asia and Latin America, which does not receive enough attention. The programme, however, now runs at over 350 million ecu a year--more than three times its size just 10 years ago.

Mr. Wells : Will the hon. Lady give way?

Mrs. Clwyd : No, not yet. I have only just started my speech. The hon. Gentleman will be able to make his speech in his own time. The proposals to reform the framework for Community assistance to Asia and Latin America--

Mr. Wells rose --

Mrs. Clwyd : If the hon. Gentleman wishes to make a speech, he may do so when I sit down. I am not giving way.

Mr. Wells rose --

Mr. Deputy Speaker : Order. The hon. Lady has made it clear that she is not giving way at this stage ; the hon. Gentleman must not persist.

Column 753

Mrs. Clwyd : The proposals--

Mr. Wells rose --

Mrs. Clwyd : If the hon. Gentleman would wait until I have completed more than a paragraph of what I have to say, we could start the debate. Until then, perhaps he will allow me to develop my theme.

The proposals to reform the framework for the Community's assistance to Asia and Latin America come at an important time for both regions, particularly in regard to their relationship with Europe. In Latin America, countries are striving to build economies to consolidate the democratic gains of recent years--although, sadly, that process has suffered a serious setback following recent events in Haiti.

After a disastrous decade of debt and economic decline, which has left Latin Americans 10 per cent. poorer than they were a decade ago, some glimmers of economic hope are now appearing in countries such as Mexico and Chile. Despite the bullish reports from some parts of the financial press, however, we should make no mistake about the fact that formidable obstacles still face the continent--and, paricularly, its poorest people. Sluggish levels of world growth, the legacy of a decade of debt-induced cuts in social and economic investment, slow progress in the dismantling of developed countries' trade barriers and unsustainably high levels of debt service remain.

In central America, there is now real hope of a peace settlement, particularly in El Salvador. Once peace is secured, the task of reconstruction is massive. There is the need for physical rehabilitation, not least from the devastating environmental impact of war--including the destruction of thousands of acres of forest by Government bombing raids in the Morazan region of northern El Salvador over recent years. There will also be the need to support agrarian reform measures, to give the poor and landless a fairer share of the country's land and to act to put right one of the central popular grievances behind the long-running and bloody war. In Asia, the challenges are even greater. It shares with central America some of the challenges of post-conflict

reconstruction--particularly in Cambodia, with the planned signing of the peace accord on Wednesday. First, the remaining political problems must be confronted. In particular, Britain, through the Community and the United Nations, must not accept a return to positions of power for the Khmer Rouge representatives implicated in the genocide of the Pol Pot era, as seems all too possible. Secondly, Britain must end a shameful aid and trade embargo that has continued to punish one of the poorest countries and peoples in the world. Community aid will have a crucial role in helping Cambodians to rebuild their country's shattered economy. I hope that the Minister of State will say something about that later. Will she also comment on the position in Vietnam and tell us what she will do to ensure that that country, which for so long has been denied crucial development aid, receives that essential assistance. Although the region which, apart from a few important exceptions such as the Philippines, has not normally been thought of as debt-troubled, the recent financial crisis in India should warn us against complacency. The starkest challenge is posed by the level of poverty in Asia, and I am glad that the Minister placed such a strong emphasis on alleviating poverty. More than 70 per

Column 754

cent. of the world's poor--struggling to live on less than 50p a day--live in Asia. In south Asia, people can expect to live on average to just 56 years of age--10 years less than in Latin America. Only 65 per cent. of primary school-aged children are enrolled for primary school education in south Asia and that is just above the figure in sub-Saharan Africa.

If the European Community is to play a full part in the concerted efforts to cut world poverty--something that the World bank development committee reaffirmed in Bangkok last week as the highest priority of the international development community--it must allocate adequate resources to Asia.

The Minister referred to a high priority for women. I hope that she can tell us what percentage of the aid will be directly focused on women. When questioned in the past about the direction of poverty alleviation and its aid programme for women in developing countries, the Overseas Development Administration has provided completely inadequate answers.

The relative allocation of Community aid between Asia and Latin America is one of the key points in the new guidelines that we are considering. There has been a long-running debate in the Community on that issue, and I am glad that there is reference to that point in the ODA's memorandum. Given its relative poverty, Asia continues to be considerably underfunded by the Community. Although no explicit financial split is set out in the document, there are clear and worrying references that imply a move away from Asia. For example, article 2 states that all developing countries in the regions are eligible

"for development assistance and economic co-operation", opening the way for more aid to be pushed to Latin America. Specific new criteria added for widening the programme--for example, support for drug substitution programmes--also implies diversion of aid away from the poorest countries.

We believe that the proposed guidelines could lead to a diversion of aid from the poorest towards bringing Community businesses the greatest commercial gain. Aid will be used instead, as the Commission states,

"to promote European investment in the ALA developing countries." The gradual loss of focus on the poorest countries and the poorest people is a worrying trend that must be actively resisted by the Government. I hope that the Minister can assure us that the guidelines will not be allowed further to tilt the balance of the Community's programme with non-Lome countries away from Asia, where the greatest levels of poverty lie. What is the Minister doing to ensure that the overriding priority of helping the poorest is compatible with promoting Community business under the guidelines? There are also serious concerns about the programme over funding. The Council of Ministers recently attempted to cut elements of the Asia-Latin America programme to find money for the 400 million ecu aid package for the Soviet Union.

Did the Minister support the Council of Ministers' proposal to cut 14.8 million ecu in commitments from budget line B7/3005 for support for small and medium-sized businesses, including the co-operatives in Asia? Did she, in the Council of Ministers, support the proposal to cut 10.8 million ecu of commitments from budget line B7/3015 for similar activities in Latin America?

Column 755

Although the cuts have been opposed by the European Parliament, the attempts to cut aid to Asia and Latin America belie the oft-repeated assurances by the Commission and by the United Kingdom Government that the south will not lose out to the east.

Mr. Hugo Summerson (Walthamstow) : I am sure that the hon. Lady will find time to welcome the proposal by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister to remit entirely the debts of the poorest countries to the tune of £550 million.

Mrs. Clwyd : Of course one welcomes that move by the Prime Minister. Opposition Members have been urging it for a long time. That leaves, of course, a percentage still owed by the poorest countries to the commerical banks and to multilaterals. I hope that the Prime Minister will also address that point in future proposals to allay the debt of some of the poorest countries. I hope also that he will apply himself to the debts of some middle-income countries, which are equally worrying and in respect of which we have also been urging some debt relief.

Mr. Corbyn : Although any relief of debt must be welcome news for the poorest in the poorest parts of the world, my hon. Friend will be aware that the Prime Minister, in making his statement, also put down considerable conditions, insisting on the adoption of market economy measures which have been a palpable failure in this country and in many other parts of the world. That is a condition on which the British Government would be prepared to write off those debts.

Mrs. Clwyd : I thank my hon. Friend for reminding us of that point. I am sure that his remarks will not fall on deaf ears on the Government side of the House.

The other major change included in the document is the proposal to end the present practice of the EC aid programme to Asia and Latin America being run on a system of single-year cycles. That practice has been rightly criticised as clearly working against long-term planning. As the Minister said, we welcome the principle of changing to multi-year programmes, allowing the Community and recipients to build a proper long-term strategy for its aid and economic co-operation in Asia and Latin America which is badly lacking at present.

There are also other welcome elements in the guidelines, some of which the Minister mentioned, such as the stress on human rights and democracy, the undertaking to direct aid towards the poorest people, and references to support for the human dimension of development, notably the role of women. As I said, much lip service has been paid to directing aid towards women. I hope that the ODA will have specific targets and be able to answer specific questions on that point.

Dr. Godman : With regard to improvements in human rights and the development of parliamentary democracies in Latin American countries which, rightly and properly, are to receive this sort of assistance from the European Community, is my hon. Friend aware of any discussions with United Nations officials concerning that aid? I remind her that Mr. de Soto and his colleagues have performed admirable work on behalf of the United Nations in El Salvador and Guatemala. Perhaps their experiences in those countries might help the European Community's deliberations concerning those criteria.

Column 756

Mrs. Clwyd : I thank my hon. Friend for making those valuable points. I hope that the Government will also be even-handed in their consideration of support for human rights. There is plenty of evidence that the Government have not been even-handed and that, depending on their attitude towards the rulers of certain countries, they will turn a blind eye to the abuse of human rights in those countries.

I agree with the reservation in the ODA memorandum on the vagueness of the guidelines on environmental vetting. The issue of implementation is even more important. In practice, the record of EC aid to the regions is appalling. Let us take Bangladesh as an example. At the end of last year, the EC Court of Auditors produced an utterly damning report on the record of the Community's programme to that country between 1976 and 1988. One of the report's criticisms was that none of the 12 major problems looked at, which accounted for nearly three quarters of the total spent in the period, achieved its main socio-economic objectives. It stated that most projects set unrealistic completion dates. A cotton project that was supposed to take three years was still less than three quarters implemented after eight years. One cereals project started three months after it was supposed to finish. The assessment and monitoring of the EC programmes was weak.

Aid was given to improve veterinary services for livestock, assuming that that was behind the shortage of animal power for ploughing and other tasks in rural Bangladesh. In fact, the shortfall had more to do with the lack of fodder and of credit for farmers to buy animals, which the project did nothing to tackle. Monitoring was poor, which is hardly surprising because the report reveals that, since the middle of 1986, only one person in Brussels had responsibility for monitoring the 65 EC-funded infrastructure projects in various countries, and that he did not visit Bangladesh once.

It is not only in Bangladesh that EC aid has failed to reach the poorest. To choose just one example from the Latin American programme, 18.5 million ecu was allocated for the Central American civil aviation authority to equip the airline network with radar--hardly much help to the struggling peasant farmers or agricultural workers on poverty pay across the region.

The lessons from Bangladesh and from other EC programmes in Asia and Latin America are that, although it is important to have better guidelines for Community aid to Asia and Latin America, it is even more important to ensure that the guidelines are followed and properly implemented.

Ministers have not been slow to agree about the shortcomings in EC aid-- almost as a way of diverting criticism from the bilateral programme--but the Government's attitude to the scandal of wasted EC aid has been as ambiguous and confused as their attitude to Europe in general. They distance themselves from the shortcomings of EC aid by shifting the blame on to the Community, as though they were not part of it. It is imperative that the Government do more to be actively and constructively engaged in ensuring that programmes under the new guidelines are carefully assessed, monitored and evaluated in practice. Perhaps our European partners would pay more heed to what the British Government have to say about the quality of Community aid if we were seen to be serious in our commitment to the overall level of aid funding instead of cutting aid to just 0.27 per cent.

Column 757

of GNP last year--the lowest ever on record and something that the Minister herself told us last week that she regretted.

With a Labour Government in place by June next year for the start of Britain's presidency of the Community, we will act to ensure that Britain's aid programme is adequately funded and that Europe's aid programme to Asia and Latin America is effectively used in the battle against poverty.

11.39 pm Sir Michael Marshall (Arundel) : Having just returned from Asia and Latin America, I am glad to have this opportunity to say a few words in this debate. When I read the guidelines for co-operation with developing countries in Latin America and Asia, I was worried about the bloodless nature of the prose. When I considered some of the problems with which both Latin America and Asia are confronted, I was anxious about the way in which the proposed implementation would work in practice. Also, the sanctions to which my hon. Friend the Member for Hertford and Stortford (Mr. Wells) referred earlier seem to call come matters into question. Having heard my right hon. Friend the Minister, I was somewhat more reassured, although I still wish to put some questions to her. I appreciated in particular the robust ending of her speech, in which she said that the Council of Ministers, as I would hope, is there to make political judgments, to take the bloodless prose and to consider some of the practical problems and what can be done to resolve them.

In paragraph 5.2.2, the guidelines state :

"the Commission considers it neither desirable nor possible to retain the original objectives for Community aid to the developing countries in Asia and Latin America, if only because the needs of these countries have changed."

That is undoubtedly true, but it is precisely because of those changes that I suggest that there is an opportunity perhaps to sharpen up the way in which Community aid, along with bilateral aid, might be directed.

One must observe in Latin America the truly remarkable political development of the ending of so many "murky military dictatorships", as my right hon. Friend described them. That presents us with an era ahead in which Latin America and Europe will come closer and closer together. That is to be greatly welcomed. It is perhaps indicative of that that, at the Inter-Parliamentary Union conference just over a week ago, Spanish was introduced as a third main language, after many generations of having English and French as the only effective official languages. That is a sign of the times, and something which, again, I welcome.

Within the document, there are some good thoughts on the environment and so on and, indeed, on the general framework of how economic aid to those countries might be applied. But I wish to concentrate on drugs for a moment in relation to aid to Latin America. It seems to me that the stated objective of helping to stamp out drug production is all very fine, but I am worried about the degree to which aid seems to be specific, in the sense that it is not coupled directly with whether there is a total commitment to stamping out drug production.

I hope that my right hon. Friend can assure me that, at the political level, assessments will be made to ensure that

Column 758

aid which is given throught the community does not go hand in hand with economies which are being successfully driven forward by ever-increasing drug production. There should be some relationship there. There should be some willingness to withdraw, if that is seen as a feature of certain countries.

Mr. Corbyn : In the hon. Member's discussions with people about the awful problem of drug production in Latin America, was the problem raised with him that many farmers are paid such disgracefully low prices for legitimate crops that they produce that to some extent they feel themselves pushed into drug production against their wishes, and certainly without any wish to pollute our youth in Europe or north America with the consequences of their drug production, the profits from which go, of course, to the millionaires in between?

Sir Michael Marshall : The hon. Gentleman makes a fair point. The obvious corollary is surely to ensure that aid goes to helping to resolve that balance. That is the type of aid that I would like to see.

I shall be brief, because I am aware that others wish to speak, and we have only a short time. Turning to the problems of Asia, I want to concentrate not on the environment, population or drugs, which are well known problems, but on human rights. The problem of human rights in Asia is massive. Before I deal with it, I must cross swords briefly with the hon. Member for Cynon Valley (Mrs. Clwyd). She suggested that we should simply continue to push aid into Asia-Pacific on an ever-increasing scale. In touching on that problem, she ignores an important and significant shift within the Asia- Pacific region.

Anyone who has had the chance to attend Asia-Pacific conferences recently must be greatly encouraged by the way in which more and more countries within the region are beginning to see a commitment--indeed, a positive moral imperative--to assist in the process of development within the region. One can cite the constructive attitude of Malaysia, Singapore, Japan and Korea in that regard. Therefore, one should not automatically assume that there is a straight, upward European progression. It must be related to what is being done in the region. Given that resources will always be limited, one should not just take a straight, upward-curve view of life about assistance to Asia. One must balance those two factors.

I was pleased that my right hon. Friend stressed human rights. Against the background of Harare, with the tie in the Commonwealth of aid to progress on human rights, we see a standard that I should like to believe could be more widely spread throughout Asia. The human rights problems are well known, and I do not need to repeat them in detail.

There is a long way to go on rights for women and children. The House does not need to be reminded of all the figures, but in Asia, particularly in the Indian subcontinent, the overwhelming number of illiterate women is one of the greatest single barriers to progress for their future and that of their country. I hope that my right hon. Friend, if not tonight then in future, can let me know how much aid is spent, not just on women and children as the hon. Lady requested, but on that specific area of illiteracy, which is the greatest challenge of all.

In many areas of human rights, whether on a country's record on political prisoners or on the rights of ethnic

Column 759

minorities, our aid, whether bilateral or through the Community, must increasingly look for progress and should indeed include some sanction if we cannot find progress. In short, what has been said in Harare sets the standard which should apply not only to our bilateral aid, but to the aid that we are discussing tonight.

11.46 pm

Mr. D. N. Campbell-Savours (Workington) : I shall be only a few moments and shall follow the hon. Member for Arundel (Sir M. Marshall) in his comments, particularly about south-east Asia. We should treat the hon. Gentleman's proposition with some importance. There is a great scope for many of the major manufacturing countries in south-east Asia--certainly Japan, Hong Kong and the other countries that he mentioned--to play a far more responsible role in developing the countries on their doorstep, which in many ways are underdeveloped. However, there is a danger, as I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will agree. Japanese aid policy is often determined by self-interest, and if the Japanese were given almost a monopoly arrangement on, for instance, the right of access for aid, in the long term they might abuse it and turn some of those smaller countries virtually into satellite manufacturing states, creating a Greater Japan and developing further industrial strength for it. One should bear that consideration in mind, particularly when considering the role of Japan in that area.

I wish to tackle tht Minister on the report of the European Court of Auditors. A couple of years after I was first elected, my hon. Friend the Member for Blackburn (Mr. Straw) made a notable speech in the House about a Court of Auditors report. Those reports are rich pickings, and we now have them on Community aid. It seems, however, that little changes. The right hon. Lady said that a couple of staff from the Department has been seconded to the Community to advise, in order to secure higher standards in the quality of aid. I am not altogether convinced that that is sufficient. The European Parliament needs to set up a Public Accounts Committee, similar to the operation that we have in the United Kingdom. It is due to lack of accountability, in terms of not being able to ask questions of the civil servants in the Commission responsible for implementing these policies, that no action is taken to rectify problems.

The right hon. Lady should take that principle on board, and I shall press it as and when a Labour Government are elected--because I believe that European institutions should be kept far more accountable in terms of the public moneys that they expend. There was a statment tonight on the tapes about the Vietnamese boat people. I had expected far greater numbers of people to be involved in the agreement, but there are fewer than 300. A number of my hon. Friends have visited the camps, as have Conservative Members, and the conditions are quite appalling. The Hong Kong authorities are struggling to resolve an insoluble problem. The international community is not interested in playing its part in resolving the problem. Indeed, if people from those camps were invited to more developed parts of the world, that would only lead to an even greater invasion of people from Vietnam into Hong Kong and other parts of south-east Asia. Some people who are genuine refugees will always have a right to move to different parts of the

Column 760

world, but we must not set up a system which simply invites more and more people to Hong Kong and south-east Asia.

How can we get out of the mess? The only answer is for the western powers, and particularly the European Community, to change their attitude to investment in Vietnam. That country is crying out for investment. If it thought that the investment tap was to be turned on, it might see the problem of the resettlement of its people in a different light. I hope that the right hon. Lady will consider that suggestion.

Tonight my hon. Friend the Member for Cynon Valley (Mrs. Clwyd) and I had an interesting dinner with a professor from Strathclyde university. The subject of our conversation was the attitude of successive British Governments to the export of technology, particularly in relation to power generation. The Minister will be aware that my hon. Friend has tabled many questions on this matter recently and that there have been some heated exchanges on ATP--aid and trade provision--policy.

If the Minister was honest with herself, I am sure that she would accept that problems arise with the technology involved in such programmes. I do not believe that those problems can be abolished overnight, as they are part of a deep-rooted section of British industry that has somehow managed to graft itself on to part of the aid budget.

It could be argued that one should start reprofiling the available aid into technologies which meet environmentally acceptable criteria. The non-fossil fuel obligation is an interesting example of such development. If one creates a market, industry then moves to react to those new conditions. Is it not possible for the Government to reprofile British industry exports that are ATP-supported or tied-aid-supported towards projects which are environmentally acceptable?

In recent months, the Minister has made some commendable speeches on good governance. The Foreign Secretary also made a good speech on the subject in Westminster Hall about six months ago. Could the right hon. Lady start developing the case for changing the nature of our exports in this area towards such environmentally acceptable projects? I accept that the Minister might claim that she is already doing so, but that this is not coming through in the presentation of policy.

I have spoken to those who work in the relevant agencies and they remain unconvinced at this stage that meaty negotiations are taking place with British industry about changing the profile of the exports. The problem is that, unless major initiatives are taken and the Government lay down far stricter criteria on what projects they are prepared to support, we shall stick to the old pattern of ATP allocation, with all the dangers and environmental instability that that can create in some parts of the world. I make those points on the back of this debate because much of that technology is going into the areas to which we have referred tonight.

Finally, I give an example of where that could have been done but was not. We fought a war in the Falklands in 1982. The Ministry of Defence spent hundreds of millions of pounds on logistical support during and after the war. Instead of sending vast amounts of oil for power generation there, why did we not send windmill technology, which is now very advanced? One windmill can produce three quarters of a megawatt of electricity. Only 1,800 people live in that part of the world, so a couple of windmills would provide electricity for most of the

Column 761

Falklands islands--certainly enough for the south of the islands, where most of the people live. Instead, we sent ships loaded with oil.

That simple proposition helps to concentrate our minds on the fact that there are other ways to deal with problems of power generation, which do not require the burning of fossil fuel. Yet they are available in the form of fairly cheap technology.

11.57 pm

Mr. Jim Lester (Broxtowe) : It is a pleasure to follow the hon. Member for Workington (Mr. Campbell-Savours) and find that I agree with every point that he has just made.

I have always understood that our proposals for change in the European Parliament are about financial and public accounts control, and to give the European Parliament an opportunity to question the European budget as we do in the House.

I follow the hon. Gentleman's point about the Vietnamese boat people. In spite of the pros mentioned by my hon. Friend the Member for Arundel (Sir M. Marshall), all the documents show a convergence and improvement that are to be welcomed. We also welcome the efforts of my right hon. Friend the Minister and her officials in bringing that about. It is clear that, in those areas of the world, unless there is a convergence and a common policy on development, we shall not chip away at the huge problems which we all recognise exist. I shall mention three countries for which there is a sense of urgency. First, I follow the hon. Member for Cynon Valley (Mrs. Clwyd) in mentioning Cambodia. Those of us who have been involved in that country's agonising moves toward the ending of a war and its potential for re-establishing itself in the community of nations look forward to the signatures of the various parties on Wednesday and the setting in motion of the virtuous circle, rather than the other one, which has been the source of such despair for so long.

We are fairly sanguine about that situation and know that it will need a great deal of diplomacy and skill before things are seen to be happening on the ground. It would help if we could make a statement on our attitudes toward the new Supreme National Council and the problems of resettlement, which is one of the subjects that concern us. The Secretary-General is well aware that a hurried resettlement, or driving across the border by any faction that has people in Thailand, would be deplored by all of us.

Statements about resettlement and the shortfall in funds that is likely to be declared in Paris would be a helpful way for us to play a part in bringing about the changes in Cambodia that we want to see. Those of us who have been there know the scale of need in the short term, but it is a pump- priming exercise, because Cambodia is not like sub-Saharan Africa, but has tremendous resources and potential. Therefore, any aid that comes from this country and Europe will be of a pump-priming nature.

One aim which has been realised by visiting experts and which could be achieved relatively quickly would be to provide the know-how ability to raise taxes from the population who, at present, pay no taxes although they have a thriving market economy. We are not talking

Column 762

merely about providing big money in terms of redevelopment, roads, telecommunications, hospitals and resettlement, but of rapidly providing the new Government with the knowledge of how to operate a modern state.

I totally agree with what the hon. Member for Workington said about Vietnam. Those of us who know that country know that desperate poverty is the driving force behind people leaving and must be alleviated. That is where human rights enter the argument, because it is a matter of linking progress with development, but not denying the development in the short term. Vietnam probably has the most significant environmental problems of any country in Asia. I shall not go into the reasons for that, because everyone recognises the enormous devastation caused by the war.

There is tremendous scope for giving Europe the opportunity to break the log jam of the American embargo on Vietnam. Whatever help we give, we are essentially involved in a pump-priming exercise. With the right level of short-term aid, Vietnam could become a second South Korea in a short time, because it has an industrious, able people, and although it is not over- blessed with resources, it has a considerable potential market.

I should be grateful if my right hon. Friend the Minister could give some sign of how she hopes to lead her European colleagues on 28 November in discussions on those countries, because we are anxious for them to rejoin the family of nations and a prosperous south-east Asia so that we can concentrate even more on different countries in sub-Saharan Africa and other parts of the world that will never have the same opportunity.

One takes a harder line on human rights in Burma, which is an essential producer of drugs. So far, the aid that has gone to Burma from United Nations organisations has been solely connected with drugs. We have all stopped our aid programmes to Burma because of its appalling human rights record and its rejection of the democratic elections held two years ago. We have to weigh the relative evils : drug production and denial of human rights. If we are to deal with Burma, which is a major producer, how can we ensure that any assistance to deal with drugs is ring-fenced so that it specifically addresses that problem and gives no encouragement to what I consider to be the illegal regime currently in control in Burma ?

There is tremendous opportunity throughout the world at present. There has been change in Latin America and Asia in districts where it seemed impossible to foresee any improvement, and the same progress can be repeated in Africa and eastern Europe. The opportunities for the transfer of resources that Europe should be contemplating are tremendous. That is the answer to the economic migration that concerns many people, including my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister. Therefore, we should seriously debate the overall level of aid that we are prepared to give from the European Community, and ensure that it reaches the target countries in good time and at the right time to have the maximum effect.

12.4 am

Mr. Jeremy Corbyn (Islington, North) : I congratulate the Minister on holding this debate at a relatively early hour. The last similar debate was held, as I recall, at about 3 am.

Column 763

I represent a dissenting voice amidst all this unanimity. I note that the Minister looks pleased at last. There is something wrong with the approach being foisted on the poorest countries in the world. The continent of Latin America, for instance, has gone from having a trade surplus 30 years ago to having a significant deficit. It is in debt ; low prices paid for commodities sold by the continent have contributed to that debt, as have the high interest rates of the past 10 years.

Meanwhile, there have been enormous social upheavals. Rio is now a vast sprawling metropolis surrounded by huge shanty towns. Most other large cities throughout Latin America are the same. Local infrastructures and communities are breaking down. With that breakdown go violence, crime and poverty.

Drugs and drug production represent another major factor. That issue must be faced now and in the future. It is the poor of the inner cities of north America and of western Europe who suffer the consequences of this drug problem, and it is the poor in the poorest countries of Latin America who produce the drugs. In the middle somewhere are the millionaires whose hands are untainted by these drugs. At one end of the scale, people are forced to produce drugs because they cannot produce anything else that will pay them a reasonable price--and the results are seen on our streets. The attitude now prevalent seems to be that the only solution to Latin America's problems is a reduction in the activities of the state, which should concern itself only with security and the armed forces. The answer, it is said, lies in a rapid increase in export promotions and of inward investment to the continent. The result is the horror stories that we hear- -of schools and hospitals being closed and of water purification programmes being put back--all to pay off debts on the edict of Washington via the World bank and the IMF. I was pleased when I first heard the Prime Minister's statement on the radio last week that he was prepared to write off some of the debts of some of the poorest countries. The inevitable sting in the tail, however, is that writing off those debts appears conditional on the countries adopting what the Prime Minister calls market economics as a solution to their problems.

It is the utmost arrogance on the part of western European Governments, who have deliberately encouraged low prices for the commodities produced by these countries--and the high interest rates that have contributed to their indebtedness--to claim now that they are prepared to write off some of their debts in return for the adoption of market economics, knowing full well that those economics led to enormous social upheaval in the countries. Such arrogance resembles that of certain 19th-century English statesmen and their colonising activities around the world.

Mr. Lester : Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

Mr. Corbyn : We should be thinking a little more seriously about the consequences of some of our policies for the desperately poor people of Latin America.

Mr. Lester : Surely the hon. Gentleman understands that there is no point in writing off a country's debts without changing the policies that caused the debt in the first place? The whole point of market economics is to effect change so that those debts will not recur. Writing off debts and leaving them to accumulate again helps no one.

Column 764

Mr. Corbyn : I agree with the hon. Gentleman and hope that that does not ruin his future. The policy which caused the debt in the first place must be changed. There is no point in writing off the severe debt of those countries without looking at the policies. I have here the OECD list of such countries. The policies that need to be changed are not those relating to the degree of social activity of the state in those countries, which is usually minimal. I want to see policies that will lead to significantly higher commodity prices and much lower interest payments so that those countries will be able to develop. The hon. Gentleman seems to advocate some form of punishment of the Governments of many of those countries.

The rubric being foisted upon the poorest countries is that the solution to all their problems is the adoption of a free enterprise economy. The pinnacle of that is the GATT negotiations, the obsession of the former Prime Minister, with the idea of a world free market in food. If ever there was a manifesto for free enterprise for the big agribusiness countries of western Europe and north America, that is it. That would be the consequence of the GATT policies that the former Prime Minister sought to pursue.

We must pay attention to the environmental and social consequences and the long-term economic relationship arising from such policies. Despite all the talk about aid for the past 20 years, the reality is that the gap between the richest and poorest countries has got bigger and in many cases the economies of the poorest countries are contracting. We should pursue policies that will help to alleviate social problems and allow economies to expand in a sustainable way rather than in an environmentally destructive way. I know that the Minister has spent some time on that issue.

My hon. Friend the Member for Cynon Valley (Mrs. Clwyd) spoke about El Salvador and the unfairness of its land distribution system. I think that she said that the basis of many of that country's problems are the maldistribution of land and poverty. The same applies in Nicaragua, just across the border, where the Sandinista Government have been defeated in an election that they themselves called. The consequences of the free market economy being thrust upon Nicaragua are that co-operatives are being broken up and the big landowners are returning. Much of the social deprivation that brought about the Sandinista revolution in the first place is returning.

Mr. Jacques Arnold : Why was not land reform carried out in Nicaragua during all the years of the Sandinista Government?

Mr. Corbyn : The hon. Gentleman is wrong. A great deal of land reform was carried out. The hon. Gentleman may not have been listening carefully to my speech. I spoke about the return of unreformed land in Nicaragua to large owners who are returning and being given their land back by the current Government. That is one of the problems recreating the inequalities that brought about the Sandinista revolution. My hon. Friend the Member for Bristol, South (Ms. Primarolo) visited Nicaragua during the time of the Sandinista Government and can confirm what I have said.

Ms. Dawn Primarolo (Bristol, South) : Yes.

Next Section

Home Page