Examination of witnesses (Questions 40-59)
DEPARTMENT FOR
INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
4 JUNE 2007
Q40 Mr Mitchell: Practical experience
is the best form of direct assistance.
Sir Suma Chakrabarti: Absolutely,
but that practical experience can be in a number of sectors. For
example, the Indian Government wanted DFID help with water projects
in some states in India that are particularly badly governed.
That was going to be direct assistance, but we decided to do it
through UNICEF, rather than doing it ourselves directly. Sometimes,
the model for the provision of that assistance changes, but that
is not to say that we will not use people from Grimsby or anywhere
else when asked to bring expertise to the table.
Q41 Mr Mitchell: It is just that
we have a particular concentration of expertise, both political
and in fishing, for example.
In that case, however, if you want to employ
more people with expertise in certain areas and bring them directly
into projects, why do we pour so much into European Union efforts?
We have talked about this before. In our previous clashes, you
said that the situation was bad, but improving. However, £936
million is a lot of money to pour into a bottomless pit. I notice
that it gives less attention to rural development and rural poverty
than any of the other organisations. Given the fact that the European
Union is an agricultural protection society, that is not to be
wondered at. It does not want the development of rural production.
Sir Suma Chakrabarti: I am not
about to go into a full defence of the European Union. The issues
are fairly fundamental about over what the DFID and Parliament
have control. A large part of our aid programme, which is channelled
through Europe, is budgetised and subject to treaty. It is an
obligation about which I, my Department and Parliament do not
have any say. It is a negotiated share. It is not even negotiated
actually; it is set. We have much less leverage over those budgetised
programmes.
The programme over which we have a lot
of leverage is the European development fund, which is focused
on the poorest countries in the world: Africa, the Caribbean and
the Pacific, in particular. It is a negotiated share that Parliament
can and does debate. It advises on how it can improve. Interestingly
enough, it is the most improved multilateral channel. I should
like to believe that that is to do with the fact that both the
DFID and the national Parliament can become involved in trying
to improve it. We have much greater control over it.
Q42 Mr Mitchell: I have one final
question. The Report indicates that officers are less enamoured
of the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO). Why is that?
Sir Suma Chakrabarti: I will ask
Jim to say something about the FAO. It has had a chequered history.
We have been trying to improve its performance quite a lot. It
has done some core things well for a long time and which we need
to hang on to, one of which is standard setting across the countries
of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
and the non-OECD countries. Another is early warning for drought
and so on. Many of our humanitarian responses are because of the
FAO early-warning system. The third thing is its certain skills
in animal diseases and pest containment—the veterinary skill
set. It has been particularly important in the avian flu context
in South East Asia.
Does the FAO need to get better? Yes, it
certainly does. We have been working hard with the evaluation
to improve performance. There is a conference in November at which
we shall be using the evaluation to set with other shareholders
a new improvement plan. Jim, who will be our next ambassador for
the FAO in about two weeks' time, probably knows more about this
than anyone else.
Jim Harvey: I have seen the external
evaluation quoted as one of the hardest hitting external evaluations
of any UN agency. We have not received the final report. It comes
out in the third week of July and will be discussed at conference
in November. It was originally a UK suggestion. We do not want
to broadcast that too widely because we want ownership of the
thing with everybody else.
Sir Suma Chakrabarti: I think
that you just have.
Jim Harvey: Some years ago, Rome
was very much behind getting the idea through.
The initial reaction from the director
general was that it gives him the ammunition that needs. Well,
we shall wait and see. They key thing will be to make sure that
there is not a fragmentation between ourselves as the donors—the
G8 or the OECD group—and the G77. There is every indication
at the moment of a common understanding that everyone is getting
the picture in the aid framework that Sir Suma has been describing,
and that everyone wants a better and more effective FAO. Historically,
the problem has been a split because some people regarded it as
an aid organisation, which it is not. It is not a delivery organisation.
That understanding is coming so, over the next three or four months,
we shall have to work carefully with OECD and G77 to make sure
that everyone is putting pressure.
Chairman: Thank you.
Q43 Derek Wyatt: Am I right in thinking
that, despite the problems in Mozambique, you have not raised
the issues with the Government yourselves?
Sir Suma Chakrabarti: We have
raised those issues.
Q44 Derek Wyatt: Despite the Report
saying that you have not.
Sir Suma Chakrabarti: The Report
said that, when the NAO team was out there, it felt that it did
get not enough evidence of that. It is an accurate reflection
of the NAO's view, so we had to sign up to it. I have evidence
here of the number of times that we raised the issues with the
Government and what the Government have been doing about it. I
described some of them in answer to the Chairman.
Q45 Derek Wyatt: Why is there a discord
between the Report and what you are now saying? That has been
mentioned already. I am confused.
Sir Suma Chakrabarti: I take the
Chairman's point. I think that we should probably have been even
clearer during the process of agreeing the Report. We felt that
the NAO Report had not done us justice.
Q46 Derek Wyatt: Can you reassure
me? In Malawi, which I visited, we had a grow bag scheme through
which we gave 1 million grow bags to the poorest people. Within
four hours, they were traded on the market, because they were
given only to the President's political party. I went to the ceremony
to help give them out, and it was disturbing that such a good
idea was abused so quickly. Have we stopped that type of process?
Have we tightened up how we give such things away?
Dave Fish: We are conscious of
that sort of bias in any of our programmes. We work carefully
with Governments to ensure that such things do not happen. I do
not know the specific case in Malawi, but I can say that as a
result of the support we gave to Malawi, over two thirds of the
small farmers in the country got access to cheaper seeds and fertilisers
in a completely non-political way. That has produced some quite
remarkable increased harvests and some tremendous returns on the
overall investment. Clearly, there were problems in the case that
you described, but not in the much bigger programme that we have
been running over the past two years.
Q47 Derek Wyatt: It was a stunning
programme, so it was upsetting to see the grow bags on the black
market so quickly. Can you confirm the status of the World Bank?
Is the amount of money that DFID gives in aid now bigger than
the amount that the World Bank gives?
Sir Suma Chakrabarti: No, not
yet.
Q48 Derek Wyatt: But it will be shortly?
Sir Suma Chakrabarti: Not for
some years. It depends on what our next two or three comprehensive
spending review settlements are. At the moment, we are much smaller
than the World Bank.
Q49 Derek Wyatt: Thank you. Can you
explain how you work with local universities that have achieved
excellence in agriculture or horticulture in any of the countries
in which you operate?
Sir Suma Chakrabarti: Through
our research programmes—
Q50 Derek Wyatt: Do you sponsor science
in such universities to help the rural poor?
Sir Suma Chakrabarti: Jim, do
you know whether we sponsor?
Jim Harvey: I shall have to give
you a written answer. [1]
Q51 Derek Wyatt: Under the UK-India
education research initiative, which the Prime Minister launched
in September 2005, are you working with science, horticulture
and agriculture departments of any universities in Bangalore or
Hyderabad to help rural groups there?
Sir Suma Chakrabarti: Quite possibly,
through our research programmes. I suspect that they would involve
quite small amounts of money, but I will need to find out the
details and give you a written answer.[2]
Q52 Derek Wyatt: Let me give you
an example of what I saw last week in Hyderabad. Nokia had given
phones to rural farmers to take photographs of the roots of various
plants, which were sent to the university for analysis by MSC
students and then taken back on CD-ROM by a man on a bicycle with
a laptop, who went round showing each farmer how to achieve a
50% increase in yields in one year. That strikes me as a rather
good project. Do you mean to say that we have not done anything
under UKIERI yet, although it is nearly two years old?
Jim Harvey: The new research into
use programme that Sir Suma mentioned is being launched formally
in South Africa this month, at the Forum for Agricultural Research
in Africa. That programme will support partners to use research
findings to promulgate technology and ideas, including ICT-type
ideas. It is open to all sorts of partners; it is open not to
researchers, but to intermediaries, including universities and
people involved in such work.
Q53 Derek Wyatt: Has anyone from
the Department visited Nokia in Helsinki? Are you aware of what
it is doing with the rural poor in Africa and India?
Sir Suma Chakrabarti: I do not
know whether anyone from the Department has visited Helsinki;
I shall have to check. I know that we have worked with people
such as Mo Ibrahim and companies such as Cellnet. It is not as
though we do not have discussions with such entrepreneurs about
their impact on research, but I will have to check the specifics
of the Nokia case. [3]
Q54 Derek Wyatt: So how is the Department
familiarising itself with the latest technology and working with
its partners in the Department for Education and Skills to ensure
that the latest technology can be utilised for the rural poor?
Sir Suma Chakrabarti: We have
a close relationship with DFES; we had a joint board meeting just
a few weeks ago.
Q55 Derek Wyatt: But you have done
nothing under UKIERI, after nearly two years.
Sir Suma Chakrabarti: No, not
under that specific scheme, but we have worked on other issues.
In the autumn, a new science and innovation strategy will come
out, which will include ICT. So we need to check on the specifics
of the Nokia thing, because I just do not know for sure whether
we have been to Helsinki or not.
Q56 Derek Wyatt: Now you know that
Nicholas Negroponte has a $100 laptop for Africa; actually, it
is $175. What content are we going to provide for that? I gather
that he has sold 17 million units to Africa, so what discussions
have we had with the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and
Google to provide a basic education and content to help the rural
poor in agriculture?
Sir Suma Chakrabarti: I know generally
what discussions we have had, but not in agriculture specifically.
Jim Harvey: We are generating
a huge amount of information. I would suggest to people that they
actually look at the Research for Development website, which we
sponsor; it is part of our DFID website. There is a huge amount
of information there. Many of the people generating that information
have made it available in all sorts of media for promulgation
through these sorts of systems.
Q57 Derek Wyatt: Google announced
their investment of $100 million three years ago. You have had
quite a long time to consider how you would put content on to
that system.
Sir Suma Chakrabarti: We have
had discussions with Google about tie-up more broadly, but not
about that system. They have not asked for our help on that, interestingly
enough, although we have had discussions at senior level with
Google. In fact, I myself addressed the American foundation chief
executives just the other day. We have also had a director visit
Google and have discussions with them. However, Google did not
ask us to put money, or content, into this Negroponte initiative.
Q58 Derek Wyatt: Well, it is not
theirs to do; it is MIT's to do.
Sir Suma Chakrabarti: Well, MIT
did not approach us.
Q59 Derek Wyatt: Regarding GPS, which
is the key means of spotting lots of things now in rural areas,
have we research anywhere in Africa or India that is putting together
mapping, the Google mapping system and GPS systems to find things
out, right down to the smallest detail in the field?
Jim Harvey: I cannot comment on
that, with respect to the Google connection. I think that, if
you looked into the research that we have been funding, you would
find that there will be some work on that area. However, I cannot
say that the Google connection is there; I am not aware of that.
Sir Suma Chakrabarti: The best
thing would be for us to produce a note for you on this for the
Report, because I think that we ought to research this issue and
give you a proper answer. [4]
1 Note by witness: DFID's Strategy for Research
on Sustainable Agriculture follows two key principles-to respond
to demand from developing countries and to work with and build
the capacity of research organisations in these countries including
universities. Through this strategy we are supporting science
in a range of developing country universities. Back
2
Ev 20 Back
3
Ev 20-21 Back
4
Ev 21 Back
| 
