International Development Committee - UK Aid to RwandaFurther written evidence submitted by the Department for International Development

RWANDA: FOLLOW UP QUESTIONS FROM INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE

The Committee asked how the PM and Mr Mitchell came to agree on the three conditions set out by the PM? What discussions, and with whom, informed these three conditions (for example were the conditions based on claims in the UN GoE Report?) And, what is the relationship between the PM’s three conditions and the partnership principles?

Following the Prime Minister’s meeting with President Kagame on 11 July, the Prime Minister requested further information from DFID and FCO on a number of issues related to UK aid to Rwanda and UK engagement with Rwanda in the context of the DRC crisis. Having considered this information, on 13 August Number 10 sent a letter to DFID and FCO setting out the Prime Minister’s three conditions for disbursement of budget support to Rwanda (as reproduced in the letter that Andrew Mitchell shared with the IDC on 8 November).

An assessment against the PM’s three conditions forms part of the overall assessment that DFID will make of the Government of Rwanda’s commitment to the partnership principle on human rights and international obligations (in addition to assessing against the other three partnership principles).

The Committee asked about the impact, in terms of poverty reduction, of re-programming £8 million of budget support elsewhere. DFID evidence sets out what results it expects the £8 million provided to education and agriculture will achieve, but not what the impact for the Government of Rwanda of not having £8 in general budget support will be ie what difference does the decision make on the ground?

The Government of Rwanda (GoR) is fully committed to poverty reduction. We are, therefore, confident that our general budget support is spent on poverty reducing expenditure and is contributing to GOR’s service delivery objectives across a wide range of sectors. By reprogramming half the general budget support disbursement to two specific sectors we are sure that our funds will be spent in these sectors. We worked with GoR to identify specific under-funded plans in the agriculture and education sectors against which we expect the funds to be spent.

On the other hand, our decision to reprogramme £8 million, along with the decisions of other donors to withhold budget support, means that funding has been taken away from other priority sectors. To date, we understand that GoR has accommodated the cuts by reducing funding for rural infrastructure and justice services. Reducing general budget support has, therefore, reduced somewhat GoR’s flexibility to focus on its own priorities and funding gaps. The Government of Rwanda is continuing to adjust to the fiscal uncertainties it faces and we are continuing to monitor the impact of this.

What has been the total amount of aid, (whether budget support or not) withheld or withdrawn from Rwanda since July?

Total amount of aid withheld is approximately £19.6 million (Germany €7 million, Netherlands €5 million, Sweden SK114 million). The figures for Germany and Netherlands are related to budget support amounts which were pledged for this year but agreements have not been signed. Sweden’s figure relates to project aid as it does not provide budget support in Rwanda.

In addition, decisions on whether to release World Bank and African Development Bank loans totalling £92 million ($145.61) have been delayed.

Confirm whether both the interim and the final UN report were leaked and if so, when? When do you expect the final report to be made officially public? (a rough estimate if it is not possible to pin down a date)

Both reports of the Group of Experts were leaked shortly after being passed to the UN. The interim report was leaked in June and the final report in October. At present we anticipate that the final report may be made public at end of November.

November 2012

Prepared 30th November 2012