Written Answers to Questions
Monday 26 June 2006
International Development
Aid Budget
Mr. Andrew Mitchell: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what the budget allocation for (a) Thailand, (b) Burma, (c) Malaysia, (d) Cambodia, (e) Vietnam, (f) Laos, (g) Indonesia, (h) Singapore, (i) Philippines and (j) East Timor (i) was in 2005-06 and (ii) is in 2006-07. [77795]
Mr. Thomas: DFID allocates annual programme budgets for five of the countries specified: Burma, Cambodia, East Timor, Indonesia and Vietnam. DFID spends modest sums in some of the other countries specified through regional projects and through support for non-governmental organisation (NGO) projects bid for through DFID's Civil Society Challenge Fund.
The following table provides details of total DFID spend by country for 2005-06 and 2006-07:
| £ million | ||
| Country programme | 2005-06 | 2006-07 |
| (1 )None. | ||
Burma
Mr. Andrew Mitchell: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what research he has commissioned on the role aid can play in promoting democracy in Burma. [77798]
Mr. Thomas: During the last year DFID has commissioned two research projects that examine the role that aid can play in promoting democracy in Burma.
Firstly, the Burma Strategic Development Assessment (SDA), undertaken on behalf of a range of donors currently active in Burma, identifies barriers to the achievement of sustainable peace and a successful transition to democracy. The SDA concludes that international humanitarian assistance should both
ensure that conflict is not exacerbated, and, where possible, should contribute to the creation of the conditions necessary for a successful transition to democracy. Secondly, the Kataya (Burma Change) programme has researched a number of change processes in Burma to better understand how change happens, and how change could be influenced through development assistance.
These two pieces of work suggest that there is an opportunity for donors to do more through their programmes to support peace-building and to help build the foundations of democracy in Burma. They suggest that donors should look to achieve humanitarian impact and to ensure that their programmes are conflict sensitive, but that they should also proactively seek opportunities to strengthen the key building blocks of democracy such as local accountability and local participation in decision making, through initiatives bringing together a range of Burmese partners (particularly from civil society, but also possibly the media, the private sector and local government). We are now considering how best this approach could be put into action.
Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what proportion of aid in the form of (a) food, (b) medical supplies and (c) shelter is being supplied to internally displaced Karen, Shan and Karenni people in Burma through mechanisms inside the country. [78097]
Mr. Thomas: In October 2005, the Thai Burma Border Consortium estimated that there were 540,000 displaced people in Eastern Burma. Of these, 340,000 were living in ceasefire areas; 108,000 were in State Peace and Development Council (SPDC) relocation sites; and 92,000 were hiding in conflict areas. DFID’s approach to providing assistance to these IDPs has been to work inside Burma—including assistance through local civil society groups (DFID has established effective relationships with a range of ethnic minority and other groups), through the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), and by trying to improve access to displaced people to benefit from our project activities. These are not the only mechanisms through which donors can help (many, for example, fund cross-border teams operating from Thailand) but they enable access to IDPs who would not be reached by any other means, and through mechanisms which are much less-well supported by other donors.
However, these extremely vulnerable people are very difficult to access—both cross-border from Thailand and from inside Burma—and there are currently no comprehensive figures on how much aid reaches them. We are in discussion with groups both inside and outside Burma to try to identify how we can increase the amount of assistance that reaches displaced people and we will be reviewing the nature of our own support before the end of the year.
John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what budget he expects to be allocated to Burma in each year between 2006 and 2009. [79246]
Mr. Thomas: The following budgets have been allocated to DFID’s bilateral programme in Burma:
In addition to this bilateral programme, approximately 18 per cent. of the European Commission’s programme in Burma can be attributed to UK Overseas Development Assistance (ODA) through the UK’s annual contribution. Over the past five years, the average of this amount has been £7.5 million.
The budget for 2008-09 has not yet been allocated.
John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development how much his Department has spent on providing aid to internally displaced people in Burma in the last five years other than through the International Committee of the Red Cross. [79249]
Mr. Thomas: In addition to the support which we have provided to the International Committee of the Red Cross over the past five years, in 2005-06 and 2006-07, we have funded some activities which are delivered through local community organisations and are focussed on directly benefiting internally displaced people (IDPs) hiding in conflict areas (US$364,000 over two years).
Our health, education and rural livelihood projects provide assistance in eastern Burma, and support internally displaced people in temporary settlements and designated relocation sites, as well as other vulnerable people. It is not possible to provide an estimate of the percentage of spending on these projects which reaches IDPs. This is primarily because it is extremely difficult to gather reliable statistics about the demographics of the population in Burma and the origin of project beneficiaries.
John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what percentage of internally displaced people in Burma can be reached by aid delivered inside the country. [79250]
Mr. Thomas: Internally displaced people in Burma are not a homogeneous group. In October 2005, the Thai-Burma Border Consortium, a Thailand-based non-governmental organisation which receives DFID funding, estimated that the number of internally displaced people (IDPs) in eastern Burma was at least 540,000. This comprised approximately 340,000 people in temporary settlements in ceasefire areas administered by ethnic nationalities, 108,000 villagers who had been evicted by the Burmese Government and moved into designated relocation sites and 92,000 civilians hiding from the Burmese Army in areas most affected by armed conflict. The recent military offensive against the Karen people has swelled the number of civilians hiding in conflict areas by as many as 18,000.
DFID provides assistance to IDPs through a number of different routes within Burma. DFID’s provision of emergency assistance to IDPs hiding in conflict areas is through local community groups inside Burma. DFID’s support to IDPs in temporary settlements in ceasefire
areas in eastern Burma is through the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), to which we provide £500,000 a year, of which approximately 75 per cent. is attributable to work with displaced people in this area. In addition, our health, education and rural livelihood projects provide assistance in eastern Burma, and support internally displaced people in temporary settlements and designated relocation sites, as well as other vulnerable people.
It is not possible to provide an estimate of the percentage of IDPs in Burma who can be reached by aid delivered inside the country. This is primarily because it is extremely difficult to gather reliable statistics about the demographics of the population in Burma and often of the origin of project beneficiaries. We believe that it is not currently possible to reach all IDPs either cross-border from Thailand or from inside Burma—and that each approach enables access to IDPs who would not be reached by any other means.
John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what the budget allocation is for pro-democracy projects in Burma in 2006-07. [79251]
Mr. Thomas: Increased prospects for a successful transition to a democratic society is one of DFID’s four objectives in 2006-07 and all projects funded from DFID’s £7.5 million budget for 2006-07 include elements contributing to this outcome. There are no current projects focused entirely on pro-democracy.
However, during the last year, DFID has commissioned two research studies that examine the role that aid can play in promoting democracy in Burma. Firstly, the Burma Strategic Development Assessment (SDA), undertaken on behalf of a range of donors currently active in Burma, identifies barriers to the achievement of sustainable peace and a successful transition to democracy. The SDA concludes that international humanitarian assistance should both ensure that conflict is not exacerbated, and where possible, should contribute to the creation of the conditions necessary for a successful transition to democracy. Secondly, the Kataya (Burma Change) programme has researched a number of change processes in Burma to better understand how change happens, and how change could be influenced through development assistance.
These two pieces of work suggest that there is an opportunity for donors to do more through their programmes to support peace-building and to help build the foundations of democracy in Burma. They suggest that donors should look to achieve humanitarian impact and to ensure that their programmes are conflict sensitive, but that they should also proactively seek opportunities to strengthen the key building blocks of democracy such as local accountability and local participation in decision making, through low-level initiatives bringing together a range of Burmese partners (particularly from civil society, but also possibly the media, the private sector and local government). We are now considering how best this approach could be put into action.
Bob Spink: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development how much the Government will contribute to the three diseases fund for Burma in each of the next three years. [79548]
Mr. Thomas: The initial concept of DFID involvement in the new multi-donor fund to tackle HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria in Burma was approved in March 2006, but the final details have yet to be finally approved, including the level of DFID’s financial allocation.
Bob Spink: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development whether resources from the new three diseases fund for Burma will be able to reach (a) Karen, (b) Shan and (c) other internally displaced peoples; and if he will make a statement. [79549]
Mr. Thomas: The initial concept of DFID involvement in the new multi-donor fund to tackle HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria in Burma was approved in March 2006, but final details of DFID’s involvement have yet to be finally approved. One of the decisions we are considering is whether the allocations of the 3D Fund would be able to reach Karen, Shan and other internally displaced people.
Indonesia
Mark Simmonds: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development how much non-financial assistance the Government have pledged to Indonesia in the aftermath of the recent earthquake. [77933]
Mr. Thomas: DFID sent two humanitarian specialists to Yogyakarta within 48 hours of the earthquake to undertake a rapid assessment of the situation. The field team gathered first-hand information that allowed us to identify critical needs of the affected population. DFID funds were then quickly allocated. Our field team worked with the multilateral organisations and other donors especially in the affected areas to facilitate a comprehensive response.
DFID’s Jakarta office supported the field team by liaising with donors and relief agencies based in Jakarta to gather information on others’ plans and assessments. In addition, we were able to provide urgent relief in the immediate aftermath of the disaster through local NGOs, co-ordinated by DFID staff from a forestry project based in the affected area. With this support, volunteers organised by the DFID project provided sustenance, shelter and basic household equipment to thousands of people.
Andrew Gwynne: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what discussions he had with (a) agencies capable of large-scale infrastructure projects, (b) aid agencies and (c) non-governmental organisations in relation to the Indonesian earthquake relief effort. [79908]
Mr. Thomas: DFID staff based in Indonesia have maintained close contact with agencies capable of large-scale infrastructure projects, primarily the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank, in considering the case for a UK contribution to the long-term reconstruction effort. We are now actively discussing with these agencies practical options for supporting the reconstruction of housing, which was particularly badly hit by the earthquake.
In addition, DFID staff have held regular discussions with a wide range of other aid agencies and NGOs, both local and international, in assessing needs and co-ordinating responses to the earthquake. These discussions were crucial in informing the allocation of the £5 million so far committed by DFID to the humanitarian relief phase of the disaster.
Inter-American Development Bank
Colin Burgon: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what proportion of his Department’s funding for South America in 2006-07 is being channelled through the Inter-American Development Bank. [78051]
Mr. Thomas: DFID’s main financial contribution to Latin America (South and Central America) is through our contributions to multi lateral organisations working in the region such as the European Commission, and the concessional lending of the Inter American Development Bank (IADB) and the World Bank. There is no replenishment of the IADB’s concessional lending fund in 2006-07. However, the UK has agreed to commit £2 million this year to the IADB administered Multilateral Investment Fund, which provides financial assistance primarily through grants.
DFID’s bilateral programme in Latin America is £12 million in 2006-07. An additional £7 million per year is provided through six international NGOs (OXFAM, CARE, CAFOD, HIV/AIDS Alliance, WWF and Christian Aid) for work with civil society. DFID also provides assistance through centrally managed programmes (research and the Civil Society Challenge Fund) and through debt relief. DFID works with the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) and the Ministry of Defence (MOD) on the Global Conflict Prevention Pool for Latin America.
In 2005, DFID established the Markets and Governance for Poverty Reduction Trust Fund with the IADB, with funding of £1,200,000 planned for 2006-07. The IADB has also established a Trade and Poverty Trust Fund, with DFID funding of £200,000 in 2006-07. A further £400,000 will be provide through the ENLACE trust fund, which tackles social exclusion in Central America.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |