Recommendations
1. Against a backdrop of staff and administrative
efficiency targets across the civil service, including at DFID,
the tripling of DFID's budget in Vietnam in five years is a very
sharp increase to manage. However, in general terms, we were
very impressed by the quality of the work in which DFID was involved
in Vietnam. DFID staff in Vietnam were well-informed and the programme
appeared to be effective and targeted. We were provided with good
examples of the positive effect British development assistance
was having on Vietnam's development. All our comments in this
report should therefore be seen in that light. (Paragraph
8)
2. Much of DFID's programme in Vietnam focuses
on rural populations, particularly through targeted budget support
programmes: 'Education for All', which focuses on increasing
access to primary education, and the rural infrastructure-oriented
programme, 'Programme 135'. These are excellent programmes which
we applaud. (Paragraph 11)
3. Dealing effectively with growing inequality
between Vietnam's ethnic minorities and its majority will be key
to ensuring that all Vietnam's poor benefit from the country's
remarkable economic development. We therefore welcome a review
by DFID of the Government of Vietnam's policy to promote ethnic
minority education. However, given the scale of the challenge
and the apparent failure of current policies to halt the widening
inequality, we recommend that DFID work with the Government of
Vietnam and other donors to carry out such reviews across the
range of government policies towards ethnic minorities.
(Paragraph 12)
4. Vietnam has a particularly large proportion
of its population living just above the poverty line. Ensuring
that these people remain above that line, and indeed increase
their income so as to reduce their vulnerability to external shocks,
is crucial for Vietnam's further development. There is also an
increasing number of economic migrants being drawn to industrialised
centres who are at risk of becoming marginalised and vulnerable.
We recommend that DFID monitor these populations closely and work
with the Government of Vietnam to prioritise programmes which
reduce their vulnerability. (Paragraph
15)
5. We agree with many of DFID's arguments
in favour of budget support, including its multiplying effect,
and its impact on government capacity and ownership of development.
The Government of Vietnam has a good track record on poverty reduction
and should be supported. We are concerned, however, that DFID
may be neglecting other aid instruments or combinations of aid
instruments in favour of budget support, even where these could
be equally or more effective. In particular, we believe that DFID
should engage with civil society more than it currently does,
including looking at options for civil society projects to run
in parallel with Government-led initiatives. We believe that a
strong civil society in Vietnam will be crucial as the country
faces new challenges in its development, and in its social and
political evolution. (Paragraph 20)
6. It is fundamentally important that DFID
is able to demonstrate effectively its impact on poverty reduction.
We saw some evidence on the ground of this impact. But in terms
of systematic monitoring and evaluation, we believe that "reasonably
inferring" such impact is not good enough. Given that 70%
of DFID's budget in Vietnam is channelled through the Government,
we recommend that DFID urgently re-examine the level of support
it is providing to enhance Vietnam's own monitoring and evaluation
systems, in particular the capacity to produce qualitative data
and analysis. Until those systems are fit for purpose, we recommend
that DFID further enhance its own monitoring and evaluation systems,
including through allocating dedicated staff to this role.
(Paragraph 23)
7. We welcome the progress on gender equality
that is being achieved in Vietnam. We believe, however, that women
must routinely have the opportunity to participate equally in
decision-making, both at a policy level and on the ground. This
calls for a participatory approach at project level which we did
not observe in DFID's work in Vietnam. As well as ensuring basic
fairness and inclusion, such an approach would provide the Government
of Vietnam with a model for its own programmes. We recommend that
DFID devise a specific gender strategy for each of its programmes
and projects in Vietnam and share these with us within six months.
(Paragraph 28)
8. We view the priorities for a sustainable
and effective social security system in Vietnam to be: broad coverage
which includes the poorest and most vulnerable people; simplicity;
and demand-side education led by civil society. We recommend that
DFID ensure that each of these priorities is reflected in its
support in this area. (Paragraph 33)
9. In 2004, DFID was the first donor to fund
large-scale HIV/AIDS prevention programmes in Vietnam. 115 million
condoms and millions of needles have been distributed through
these programmes. These are good initiatives which we wholeheartedly
support. We recommend that a lessons-learned
exercise be carried out in connection with the underspend on the
HIV/AIDS programme and shared with us within six months.
(Paragraph 36)
10. Our report on sanitation and water makes
clear that these services sit at the heart of development. We
recommend that DFID work urgently to find the £20 million
for rural sanitation in Vietnam which DFID analysis suggests could
provide four million people with hygienic sanitation, whether
as a single donor or in coordination with other donors. DFID should
also look at options other than budget support for its work in
this sector. (Paragraph 39)
11. Given the scale of the challenge, we agree
that the DFID programme in Vietnam should increasingly focus on
governance and human rights issues. We recommend that resources
be redirected at least to double the financial resources available
for DFID's governance programme in Vietnam, mirroring the planned
increased DFID staff capacity. The refocused and strengthened
governance programme is likely to coincide with Foreign and Commonwealth
Office priorities. We recommend that DFID and FCO begin planning
now for this convergence in order to avoid duplication and to
maximise cooperation and shared resources, including staff.
(Paragraph 44)
12. DFID already supports programmes whose
aim is to ensure that the benefits of World Trade Organisation
membership reach beyond the urban industrialised areas and include
the poor and vulnerable. We support this work and endorse the
priority given to it in the draft new DFID Country Assistance
Plan for Vietnam and would expect to see this level of priority
maintained in the final agreed Plan.
(Paragraph 47)
13. DFID was not able to tell us by how much
its budget will reduce once middle-income status is attained nor
how quickly. We believe, however, that this is likely to involve
more than a "slight scaling back". DFID should therefore
begin now to set out for the Government of Vietnam the likely
changes so that it in turn is able to prepare for reduced aid
flows. (Paragraph 50)
14. We see a medium-term role for DFID in
Vietnam in providing more advice and less funding. We believe
that research-led, pioneering work is a strength of DFID's programme
in Vietnam and can lead to compelling arguments on which DFID
can base its advice to the Government. We recommend that this
work should become even more central to DFID's work in Vietnam
as it approaches and attains middle-income status. We believe
that DFID support for some small, innovative civil society projects
would complement well its role as a development pioneer in Vietnam
and recommend that DFID begin such funding in this financial year.
(Paragraph 54)
15. We agree that a strengthened and coordinated
UN presence in Vietnam offers significant potential gains for
Vietnam. We do not agree, however, that it is the only vehicle
for ensuring that Vietnam's development continues to be informed
by advice and innovation which draws on international experience
and best practice. Strong civil society groups and well-resourced
international non-governmental organisations can also offer relevant
experience while also encouraging increased government accountability.
We recommend that DFID's 'legacy strategy' be reviewed in order
to provide a much clearer role for civil society capacity-building.
(Paragraph 58)
| 
