House of Commons - International Development

Select Committee on International Development Second Report

SECOND REPORT

The International Development Committee has agreed to the following Report:-

THE DEVELOPMENT WHITE PAPER

INTRODUCTION

1. International Development is now a constant item on our television screens and in our newspapers. Subjects discussed range from the abolition of landmines, through the reduction in the emission of greenhouse gases, to Aids and infant mortality in developing countries. It has become apparent to the international community that the development of the poorer countries is not only a moral imperative but also in our own interest. The Development White Paper states, "As a country which depends more than most on international trade and investment, jobs and prosperity here in the UK depend on growth in the global economy to which developing countries could contribute so much in the future".[1] There is also, as the Secretary of State for International Development made clear to the Committee, "the environmental imperative, the growing understanding in the world that if we do not make progress ... the world will be in very serious difficulty...just in terms of population growth, environmental degradation, war, refugee movements, disease, the terrible catastrophes that could come upon everyone and that unite the interests of the north and south in the world".[2] International development must therefore be at the centre of all government policy, not just a well-meaning afterthought. It is an essential part of responsible planning for the future of our own country.

2. Not only must development be considered in all aspects of domestic policy formulation. It also is of the utmost importance in our international relationships. The White Paper points out that Britain has a unique place in the world, "No other country combines membership of the Group of Seven industrialised countries, membership of the European Union, a permanent seat on the Security Council of the United Nations and membership of the Commonwealth. Our particular history places us on the fulcrum of global influence".[3] In giving evidence to the Committee the Secretary of State for International Development, the Rt. Hon. Clare Short MP, said that using this influence to promote the development of the poorer countries "would be an enormously fine role for us on the international stage".[4] We support this ambition. To be an advocate for the world's poor would be morally right, would be in the interests of the United Kingdom, and would take full advantage both of this country's international position and of the expertise of its citizens. For such a role, however, it is necessary first to have a clear and focused development policy.

3. The White Paper on International Development, "Eliminating World Poverty: A Challenge for the 21st Century", published on 5 November 1997, provides such a policy. This was the first White Paper dedicated to international development for 22 years. Its preparation had been one of the first initiatives of the newly established Department for International Development (DFID). The creation of DFID, with a Secretary of State at the Cabinet table, is a recognition that development policy has its own logic and importance. It must never be the victim of ulterior motives or distorted by other interests. We welcome the creation of DFID. We believe that it will give new focus to the United Kingdom's development activity and also inject greater sensitivity to developmental issues throughout Whitehall.

4. The Committee agreed to conduct a short inquiry on the White Paper. The aim has not been to discuss all the matters raised in detail. That would take the whole of a parliamentary term, if not longer. The purpose of the Report has been to give an opportunity both to the Secretary of State to explain in more detail the thinking behind the White Paper and to the NGOs to comment on its contents. The Report also allows the Committee to consider the general philosophy of the White Paper and make recommendations on matters of emphasis and implementation. We trust that the Report will thus inform debate in Parliament and encourage further thought in Government on specific issues.

5. We were grateful to the Rt. Hon. Clare Short MP, Secretary of State for International Development, Mr Richard Manning, Director-General (Resources) and Mr Graham Stegmann, Head of Aid Policy and Resources, Department for International Development, for giving evidence to the Committee. We also received a number of memoranda from organisations and individuals containing their responses to the White Paper's contents. These have proved most useful as the Committee deliberated. We commend all the evidence to the House to inform any future debate on the White Paper.

INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND WHITEHALL

6. The Secretary of State has made clear that the White Paper is a Government document, not merely the view of her own department.[5] Mr Manning said that its production was "very much a coordinated process across Government".[6] Clare Short explained, "We have for the first time a commitment in Whitehall to a department that brings to the table on questions of agriculture or trade or debt or whatever it is the interests of developing countries and not just the immediate short term interest of our own country...That is an advance and we have all departments signed up to the White Paper".[7]

7. We are pleased to note this emphasis on all departments owning the White Paper. We have no doubt that the White Paper was the result of many hours of debate and some compromise across Whitehall. There is always, however, a gap between the ideal and the reality. Clare Short herself admitted that "some of the tension and pull between short term interests, between immediate departmental interests and bigger world picture interests, will remain".[8] DFID therefore will need both appropriate structures and adequate support in its advocacy of the development agenda in Government.

8. We were told of some of the structures that had been put in place since the election. A cross-departmental committee on development had been established.[9] DFID now had a representative on the committee of Whitehall officials charged with examining requests for arms export licences.[10] We welcome these initiatives and look forward to further information on how these cross-departmental committees are operating. We also welcome the fact that DFID now represents the United Kingdom at the World Bank. We trust that DFID is closely involved with the Treasury in the formulation of policy at the IMF and on the question of debt relief.

9. There remains, however, a significant omission. DFID does not have a place on the Cabinet Committee for Defence and Overseas Policy. The Secretary of State explained that she did "attend regularly, but I am not formally a member, so that I think I am not handicapped in terms of the decisions that have taken place at it. I think it may be a little bit of a snub to the Department ... there is a case for arguing that it should, as of right, as a Department be at that table"[11]. We agree with the Secretary of State. Attendance at a Cabinet Committee is not the same as formal membership, nor is that membership merely symbolic. The opinions of DFID must carry equal weight with those of other departments of State. The Government must demonstrate the seriousness of its concern to integrate developmental issues into all aspects of policy consideration. We recommend that the Secretary of State for International Development be a full member of the Cabinet Committee on Defence and Overseas Policy.

10. The Committee will certainly support DFID in ensuring that all government departments consider development matters in their policy and its implementation. The Committee will call for evidence from other government departments when relevant to an inquiry. Only thus can all government departments acquire the habit of thinking developmentally. We were pleased to note in the recently produced mission statement of the FCO a reference to combatting poverty in the world through the UK's status at the United Nations. There are other government departments whose mission statements and objectives should also make reference to the Government's commitment to international development and the elimination of poverty. They include MAFF,[12] the DTI[13] and the Treasury, to name but three. Similarly, we recommend that the departmental reports of other government departments, including the FCO, the Treasury, DTI, MAFF, DfEE,[14] DH[15] and DETRS,[16] all include a section on how their policy and activities have promoted international development and the elimination of poverty. We intend from time to time to take evidence from them on this matter.