THE DEVELOPMENT WHITE
PAPER (continued)
DISASTERS
44. The White Paper includes
panels on Disasters and Emergencies and on Dependent Territories
in its section 2 `Building Partnerships'.[94]
The Committee's recent Report on Montserrat has some bearing
on both these subjects.[95]
The White Paper reaffirms the principle that "the reasonable
needs of the Dependent Territories are a first call on the development
programme".[96]
The Committee had concluded in its report on Montserrat that
this should no longer be the case.[97]
We recommended that funding for the development of the Dependent
Territories should come from a department other than DFID. It
is important that political responsibility and financial resources
reside in the same department. It is also important to acknowledge
that the Government's responsibilities to Dependent Territory
citizens are of a different order to those to the developing world
in general. We reassert our recommendation that the reasonable
assistance needs of the Dependent Territories should no longer
be a first call on the development programme.
45. Montserrat also provides
lessons for disaster-preparedness. This theme is found in the
memorandum from Dr Ian Davis at the Oxford Centre for Disaster
Relief. The memorandum praises the section on Disasters and Emergencies,
in particular the emphases on assistance being based on "the
analysis of actual need"; the importance of participation
of all stakeholders in decisions; and the code of ethical conduct
for organisations involved in humanitarian work.[98]
46. The memorandum asks,
however, for more emphasis and detail on disaster preparedness
and mitigation. Resources should be reallocated from relief to
risk reduction. Dr Davis recommends a Hazard Impact Assessment
for all major new developments. This is necessary "to make
certain that new DFID funded development projects do not contribute,
consciously or unconsciously, to increased vulnerability".[99]
New developments should also be designed so as to resist possible
hazards. There should also be more emphasis on assistance to
"vulnerable disaster prone countries with financial resources
and technical assistance to undertake a detailed risk assessment
as an essential part of their resource management and civil protection".[100]
47. Our recent examination
of events in Montserrat, such as the ignoring of scientific reports,
the lack of disaster preparedness, the building of installations
such as an emergency jetty which could not withstand hurricane
- these all suggest that Dr Davis' recommendations on disaster
preparedness should be taken to heart by DFID. We recommend
that DFID introduce Hazard Impact Assessments for new developments
in recognised risk areas, ensure also that all such developments
are hazard resistant, and consider how best to assist vulnerable
disaster prone countries in the vital task of risk assessment.
CONFLICT PREVENTION
48. A major cause of poverty
and underdevelopment is conflict. The White Paper points out
that "Half of the world's low income countries are suffering,
or have just emerged from conflicts. Today there are some 28
major and more than 100 minor armed conflicts affecting some 70
countries."[101]
The Committee was pleased to note the importance attached by
the White Paper to conflict prevention. The White Paper rightly
states that this is "crucial to combat poverty and reduce
suffering".[102]
We would encourage DFID to put forward projects to promote
conflict prevention. We also wish to see projects concerned with
post-conflict reconstruction, in particular the creation of employment
opportunities and the rapid establishment of social services in
post-settlement reconstruction in parallel with the decommissioning
of arms.
49. We also welcome the
emphasis placed on preventive diplomacy and arms control. We
recommend that DFID provide details of the work and procedures
of the Whitehall committee charged with examining requests for
arms licences.
50. We noted the implicit
promise of policy coordination within Whitehall - "we shall
deploy our diplomatic, development assistance and military instruments
in a coherent and consistent manner".[103]
In this context of policy consistency we commend to the Government
the suggestion of Saferworld that "the Government should
introduce a conflict impact assessment that would identify how
the full range of UK development, trade, defence and foreign policies
increase or decrease the risks of violent conflicts in vulnerable
countries. This approach should also be applied to the work of
regional and international institutions such as the EU, the OAU
and the UN".[104]
Regular conflict impact assessments which identify vulnerable
countries and examine the whole range of policies and their contribution
to the prevention of conflict would be an invaluable way to secure
such coherence and focus to policy. We recommend that the
Government introduce conflict impact assessments of its policy
towards vulnerable countries and promote such an approach in multilateral
institutions.
GOOD GOVERNANCE
AND CORRUPTION
51. The White Paper emphasises
the importance of good governance, the fight against corruption,
and the rule of law.[105]
It quotes the 1997 World Development Report of the World Bank,
"good government is not a luxury - it is a vital necessity
for development".[106]
Corruption is particularly harmful for developing countries,
diverting scarce budgetary resources into unproductive expenditure,
discouraging investment, producing higher prices and fewer employment
opportunities for the poor. The Government commits itself to
help make the civil service, legal systems and democratic structures
in developing countries both efficient and equitable. It also
supports the proposals of the OECD to criminalise the bribery
of foreign public officials and to cease the tax deductibility
of bribes, and the efforts of the IMF and World Bank to promote
policies and institutional change to tackle corruption.
52. At the heart of the
Government's plans for its bilateral programme is the concept
of the development partnership. This will involve a political
commitment to poverty eradication from both donor and developing
country. On the basis of an agreed country programme a longer
term and more flexible commitment of resources will be provided
by the United Kingdom. The White Paper states that partner governments
must "pursue policies which promote responsive and accountable
government, recognising that governments have obligations to all
their people; promote the enjoyment of civil, cultural, economic,
political and social rights; and which encourage transparency
and bear down on corruption in the conduct of both the public
service and the business sector".[107]
We note that it is difficult to achieve these objectives other
than through a vigorous working democracy. Where the government
does not meet these criteria the White Paper states that such
partnership will be impossible and cooperation will only be with
alternative channels such as institutions of civil society, voluntary
organisations and local government.[108]
53. We welcome the White
Paper's emphasis on good governance and its determination to fight
corruption and to uphold human rights both through bilateral and
multilateral action. We must never again witness the use of aid
to bolster corrupt and cruel regimes. This must be the policy
of all government departments, not just DFID. We remain to be
convinced that other departments have taken this policy to heart.
We will monitor the policies and actions of all departments to
ensure they promote human rights and good governance in developing
countries.
CONCLUSION
54. This Report cannot touch
on all the points raised in memoranda. Some, such as debt relief,
will be examined by the Committee in more detail in the near future.
Other matters, also of great importance, such as education,[109]
reproductive health,[110]
ethical trading,[111]
food security[112]
and biodiversity,[113]
were also mentioned. Often there was a concern at a lack of detail
or emphasis in the White Paper. It is perhaps inevitable that
in the broad canvas of a White Paper some will be disappointed
that not more is said on a particular point.
55. We do, however, commend
the written evidence received to the attention of the Government.
We suggest that the Government use the opportunity of its response
to this Report to produce in effect a supplement to the White
Paper, not only responding to the particular recommendations of
the Committee but also expanding on points questioned in the memoranda
received. The Government is keen to have a continuing discussion
in the United Kingdom on development policy, as is clear from
its suggestion of an annual Development Policy Forum.[114]
We welcome this approach and look forward to the Government response
to our Report being the next contribution to an ongoing debate.
56. We end by again
welcoming the White Paper, which is an impressive survey of development
issues and a long overdue attempt to bring focus and coherence
to Government policy. If implemented, such policies will make
the United Kingdom a leading force for the sustainable and peaceful
development of our planet. This is a worthy ambition, and one
we will wholeheartedly support.
94
White Paper Panel 16, p.43, and Panel 17, p.44, and paras.2.28
- 2.30 Back
95
First Report from the International Development Committee on Montserrat,
Session 1997-98, HC 267 Back
96
White Paper para.2.28 Back
97
First Report from the International Development Committee on Montserrat,
Session 1997-98, HC 267, para.101 Back
98
Evidence p.88, see White Paper Panel 17 p.44 Back
99
Evidence p.89 Back
100
Evidence p.89 Back
101
White Paper para. 3.48. Back
102
White Paper para.3.50 Back
103
White Paper para.3.50 Back
104
Evidence p.81 Back
105
White Paper Panel 11, p.30 Back
106
White Paper Panel 11. p.30 Back
107
White Paper Panel 14, p.39 Back
108
White Paper para.2.24 Back
109
Evidence pp.49-52, 57, 71-72 Back
110
Evidence pp.81-83 Back
111
Evidence pp.83-86 Back
112
Evidence pp.54-55 Back
113
Evidence pp.58-66 Back
114
White Paper para.4.5 Back
| 
