Third supplementary memorandum submitted
by the Department for International Development, responding to
additional questions submitted by the International Development
Committee
TRADE LIBERALISATION
AND POVERTY
REDUCTION STRATEGIES:
Does DFID perceive any inherent tension between
the inclusion of trade liberalisation commitments in country Poverty
Reduction Strategies and the voluntary "bottom-up" mechanism
by which countries make market access commitments under the General
Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS)?
There is an important difference between a country
undertaking trade liberalisation policies as part of a Poverty
Reduction Strategy, whether in services or goods trade, and choosing
to bind those liberalising measures within the WTO rules-system.
The General Agreement on Trade in Services is
a mechanism by which countries can make binding commitments on
market access to their service sectors. Its aim is to achieve
progressively greater levels of bound liberalisation, but it does
not govern or dictate the degree to which countries should liberalise,
nor indeed the degree to which they should bind their existing
liberalisations.
It is therefore perfectly possible that a country
which has undertaken considerable service sector liberalisation
under its Poverty Reduction Strategy does not make a single binding
commitment under the GATS.
The situation of trade liberalisation measures
being undertaken under Poverty Reduction Strategies apparently
in parallel with WTO negotiations covering similar areas is not
new and exists for other areas of international trade besides
services. For example, governments also undertake to reduce tariff
levels under their PRS policy frameworks. This is different from
binding these tariff reductions under WTO rules. Where countries
wish to bind agreements under WTO rules, we would expect that
the policy issues involved would be discussed within the Poverty
Reduction Strategy process.
We do expect all key policy changes in Poverty
Reduction Strategies to be subject to a careful analysis of their
poverty and social impact. And we are continuing to work closely
with the Bank and the Fund to ensure that policy reforms included
as conditions in their own lending programmes should be directly
derived from Poverty Reduction Strategy priorities and should
be subject to careful analysis of their poverty impacts.
It must be stressed that there is no formal
requirement for Poverty Reduction Strategies to contain trade
liberalisation components. This is a decision for the developing
country in question to make as part of its overall poverty reduction
strategy. The Poverty Reduction Strategy then becomes the source
from which loan conditionality is drawn. It is not for any donor
to dictate the content of a Poverty Reduction Strategy, whether
with regard to trade or any other issue.
TANZANIA:
DFID agreed to provide information about the impact
of aid in primary school enrolment.
DFID currently provides £80 million per
year to the Government of Tanzania to support the implementation
of the Poverty Reduction Strategy. 70% is provided as direct budget
support for the priority poverty reducing sectors—education
is key.
Internal Government figures indicate that enrolment
in Standard One of primary school has risen from 897,569 in 2000,
to 1,140,554 in 2001, to 1,659,847 in 2002.
This translates into an estimated Gross Enrolment
Rate (GER) of 100.7% and Net Enrolment Rate (NER) of 99.3% for
2002, compared to a GER of 77% and an NER of 57% in 2000.
The 2002 figures indicate that not only has
Tanzania exceeded its own Poverty Reduction Strategy targets for
education, but it has also met the education Millennium Development
Goal on enrolment. This is clearly not the end of the story, and
it is important that continued work is done on the factors causing
pupils to drop out from primary school, as well as the related
issue of improving the quality of education.
HUMAN RIGHTS
IN ETHIOPIA
What is DFID's response to the Amnesty International
2003 report on Human Rights in Ethiopia?
The Select Committee asked how DFID worked with
the Ethiopian government when their human rights record is so
poor and the regime attracted considerable public criticism from
victims of human rights abuses. The Committee made the point that
this issue is difficult to handle because if a donor walks away,
then it is not helping poor people.
DFID shares the view of many, including the
Ethiopian government, that human rights in Ethiopia are a cause
for concern and that the Ethiopian government could and should
do more to ensure rights are protected. These include social and
economic rights as well as civic and political rights. But as
the Committee recognised, we also need to work with Ethiopia to
reduce poverty.
We have concluded that the best way to support
progress on human rights in Ethiopia is to work with both the
government and civil society to assist in the implementation of
government policies, including the Constitution. These are set
out in the government's Sustainable Development and Poverty Reduction
Programme (SDPRP), Ethiopia's poverty reduction strategy, and
include large scale capacity building programmes in the areas
of service delivery, decentralisation, civil service reform and
justice sector reform, among others. The SDPRP also includes important
commitments such as setting up a human rights commission and ombudsman.
We are working with the government and other
donors on a system of monitoring and evaluation of the commitments
in the SDPRP. This should enable progress to be monitored carefully
and at regular intervals.
We have signed a 10-year Memorandum of Understanding
with the Ethiopian government which makes arrangements for issues
of concern to both sides to be an important part of our dialogue
with the Ethiopian government. This includes human rights which
we raise with the government regularly.
The UK participates actively in constructive
dialogue on human rights with the government conducted through
the Article 8 provisions of the Cotonou Agreement.
GENDER AND
DEVELOPMENT GOALS
How can DFID ensure that gender and related development
goals are interpreted more broadly than the programme suggests?
DFID agreed to copy to the IDC the reply that
was being sent to the Gender and Development Network. This is
attached (Copy placed in the Library).
FAST TRACKING
WOMEN THROUGH
SECONDARY AND
HIGHER EDUCATION
Does DFID take a view on the efficacy of mass
primary education as against fast-tracking certain women through
to secondary, further and higher education in order to improve
the ratio of women in senior positions in developing countries?
We take the view that focusing on primary education
for all is more important than fast-tracking of girls into higher
education because:
— a key component of a pro-poor development
strategy is to ensure universal primary education for girls and
boys;
— mass primary education provides the
potential to continue to higher levels of education and attain
the skills necessary for gaining skilled employment;
— enrolling in and completing primary
education is key to reducing the high levels of illiteracy that
are widespread in the developing world—about 870 million
people, more than 60% of them women. Literacy is key to empowerment;
— support for mass primary education
has positive development effects;
— basic education for all is a human
right. Consequently, the Millennium Development Goals focus on
primary education for all; this in turn is reflected in DFID's
PSA targets.
Fast-Tracking Women into Higher Education
Fast-tracking women in higher education is difficult
from a development perspective because:
— it would require a specific programme
and as such does not fit with our general approach to development,
which is to develop sector plans in partnership with governments
rather than to implement separate projects. Specific fast-tracking
projects thus run the risk of becoming add-on projects and do
not work effectively towards system-wide reform;
— evidence suggests that girls who
access and complete primary education even without fast-tracking
are more than likely to continue to post-basic education. Thus,
a viable long term strategy is to develop the education system
as a whole rather than adding specific projects.
The most appropriate way to take this issue
further is as part of the new "scoping" team, which
has now been established in Policy Division (PD). Its aim is to
investigate options for supporting DFID's policies and programmes
through the effective development and use of human capital and
skills. The new team, if approved, will look again at DFID's strategy
for engagement in post-primary education and training, including
the achievement of gender equity in higher education.
11 July 2003
| 
