1 Introduction
Box
1
| Burma or Myanmar?
Throughout this inquiry we have referred to 'Burma' as this is the title used by the UK Government. Aung San Suu Kyi and others from the pro-democracy movement continue to call the country Burma as they do not recognise the legitimacy of the military government which changed the name. Whilst visiting the country we recognised that 'Myanmar', the term introduced by the military ruling regime in 1989, is far more widely used. Even though the name was introduced by the military which has fought a 50-year war against the non-Burmese ethnic groups, we were told by some of the people we met that Myanmar is seen as a more inclusive term, encapsulating all ethnic states in the country not just the Burmese heart land. We asked the Minister, Rt Hon Alan Duncan MP about this and he told us:
I think these things emerge over time. There comes a point where you can feel what is right. In our lifetime, we have seen Peking become Beijing; we have seen Bombay become Mumbai. I expect [...] that this may just change over time.[1]
|
Recent changes in Burma
1. There have been remarkable changes in Burma over
the past few years following over five decades of oppressive military
rule, though the extent and meaning of the changes are disputed.
Over a thousand political prisoners have been released. The Nobel
Peace Prize Laureate Aung San Sui Kyi has been freed from house
arrest and she and 41 of her fellow National League for Democracy
party members have been elected as Members of the newly established
Burmese Parliament. Censorship has been lifted, the press is reasserting
itself under its new-found freedoms, trade unions have been formed
and fighting across most of the ethnic regions of the country
has ended.
The current development situation
2. Despite the recent changes, Burma remains one
of the poorest countries in Asia with GDP per capita of about
$800. In comparison, its neighbour Thailand, which was once poorer,
now has a GDP per capita of $4,800. Among a population of nearly
fifty million, a third do not have enough money to meet their
basic food and living needs. Over 75% of the country does not
have access to electricity.[2]
3. Since the lifting and suspension of EU sanctions
in 2013, many donors have initiated or increased development aid
to Burma, but overall the level of official development assistance
(ODA) remains low. Save the Children said Burma receives about
$10 per capita which is roughly only 20% of what Cambodia receives.[3]
The median ODA among DFID's focus countries[4]
is $54.[5]
Our inquiry
4. We decided to undertake this inquiry into Burma
since there have been major changes in Burma over the past few
years and DFID has doubled its budget to the country since 2012.[6]
The last time we undertook an inquiry into DFID's programme in
Burma was 2007 when we recommended the quadrupling of aid by 2013.[7]
We decided to undertake this inquiry because we wanted to follow
up on our previous report and to explore the extent of the changes
in Burma and how DFID's work has been complementing these developments.
We were particularly interested in the relationship between development
aid and democracy and how well equipped DFID and its governance
team in particular were to do such work.
5. This Report concentrates on our main areas of
interest—the development of democracy under DFID's governance
programme as well as the sector with the largest DFID sector spend—health.
We look at DFID's other work to assist Burma including economic
development and education. We also re-visit the focus of our 2007
inquiry, the Thai border refugee camps.[8]
Figure 1
Source DFID submission BUR 0016
6. As part of this inquiry we spent nine days in
Burma where we met with DFID and Foreign Office officials in Rangoon,
travelled to Naypyidaw to meet with Burmese ministers, politicians
and officials and Mandalay to visit DFID projects and meet with
civil society groups and non-government organisations (NGOs).
We also went to the town of Meiktila which experienced inter-communal
violence last year. There we visited camps for both Muslim and
Buddhist internally-displaced people and spoke to local officials.
We would like to thank the DFID officials who facilitated the
visit and all of the people we met in the country.
7. We received over fifty pieces of written evidence
for this inquiry and held three evidence sessions hearing from
NGOs and commentators on Burma as well as the Minister, Rt Hon
Alan Duncan MP and Head of DFID Burma, Gavin McGillivray. We also
had informal meetings with a range of organisations and individuals,
including Burma Campaign UK. We would like to thank all of those
individuals and organisations who submitted evidence to the inquiry
and came to speak to us.
1 Q119 Back
2
Department for International Development (BUR 0016) Back
3
Q3 Back
4
There are 25 countries that DFID has a bilateral programme with Back
5
Department for International Development (BUR 0016) , para 18
Back
6
Department for International Development (BUR 0016) Back
7
International Development Committee, Tenth Report of Session 2006-07,
DFID Assistance to Burmese Internally Displaced People and Refugees on the Thai-Burma Border
HC 645-I Back
8
International Development Committee, Tenth Report of Session 2006-07,
DFID Assistance to Burmese Internally Displaced People and Refugees on the Thai-Burma Border
HC 645-I Back
| 
