ANOTHER day, another damning report into Britain’s great aid giveaway.
It is almost enough to make you feel sorry for the army of Whitehall officials
desperately trying to shovel our cash abroad, even as their bosses claim to
be committed to austerity at home.
This time it is the independent aid watchdog underlining the folly of the
Government’s pledge to give away a fixed proportion — 0.7 per cent — of
Britain’s income, regardless of the needs of recipient nations or desires of
their citizens.
The body’s investigation into spending on “fragile states” shows the obvious
repercussions of ramping up donations each year to hit a meaningless target
invented half a century ago.
Britain spends an astonishing £12billion a year on aid — a sum bizarrely
dismissed as “a very small amount” by Westminster defenders, even some on
the right.
Almost a third goes on so-called “state-building” in 28 struggling nations —
but the inquiry found it was spent too fast, without proper scrutiny, with
unrealistic targets and failed to make much difference.
This is hardly surprising. The huge sums lavished on these troubled places
have doubled in three years — even as spending on Britain’s defence was
slashed, the health service struggles and social care falls apart.
Yet these scathing results will be brushed aside by the self-serving aid
industry.
Charity chiefs on six-figure salaries will carry on making sanctimonious
claims of saving the world, echoed by politicians and pop stars trying to
look compassionate.
Yet a growing body of experts and evidence conclude foreign aid is a waste of
money, doing more harm than good by fuelling conflict, feeding corruption
and corroding democracy.
Take Scots-born professor Angus Deaton, a world-renowned expert on measuring
poverty. After a lifetime in the field, he shocked the aid world by
concluding development aid was an illusion.
As he told me, aid is not needed when conditions for development are present —
yet when they are not there, as in fragile states, it can be damagingly
corrosive.
Free money from abroad means dodgy regimes have no need to win consent from
citizens by delivering decent public services and holding fair elections.
Instead, they spend hard on security to entrench their rule.
Now look at where the torrent of taxpayers’ cash is going. We are still
giving hundreds of millions of pounds to India, despite its ambitious space
programme.
Also to Nigeria, another nation joining the space race as well as a major oil
producer and home to some of the most corrupt politicians on earth.
Its handout has more than doubled under the Coalition.
Then there is Ethiopia, the biggest single recipient of our cash despite a
horrific human rights record and the recent kidnap of a Brit as he travelled
in the Middle East.
You never hear ministers mention the billions they give to Brussels for its
woefully run aid projects.
Mind you, they might struggle to defend huge sums spent sorting out the sewers
in Turkey, let alone teaching teenagers to dance in Burkina Faso.
The truth is capitalism and consumerism are driving rapid change in the
developing world, especially when harnessed to improved governance.
Aid is at best an irrelevance, at worst a brake on development.
And it is increasingly resented abroad — especially in Africa, since it
promotes damaging images of people unable to help themselves and a continent
too dangerous to visit.
After all, how would you feel if young adults from Benin or Bolivia turned up
in your town and told you how to run your schools, hospitals and government?
It is easy to be generous with other people’s money, especially when taken
from them in taxes.
But this ill-advised aid splurge is one more reason why people are so fed up
with Westminster, especially amid austerity at home.
Justine Greening, the international development secretary, announced in 2012
that Britain would end all direct aid to the Indian government by the end of
2015.
But we are now giving money to charities and the private sector instead.
Pakistan
£405million aid. Has 13 billionaires. One now owns Fulham FC.
India
£210million aid. Only five countries have more “very rich”.
Kenya
£136million aid. Makes fortune from gas and mining. £32billion economy.
Ghana
£90million aid. Made £300million in 2011 from its reserves of oil.
South Africa
£16million aid. Wealthy enough to host the World Cup in 2010.
Indonesia
£16million aid. Rakes in cash from coal and palm oil exports.
Britain’s generous aid is working
JOE CERRELL, European head of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, says
Britain should continue to give overseas aid.
He says: “In many ways aid organisations are following the lead that the UK
has set in rooting out corruption and lifting people out of poverty.
“The biggest and best reason for Britain’s continued overseas aid commitments
is that it’s working.
“Through the generosity of donors such as the UK, we have seen incredible
progress in a number of areas.
“The one that is most dramatic is child health where the number of children
who die before their fifth birthday has declined dramatically.
“Aid has allowed for better nutrition, better sanitation and large vaccination
programmes.
“We have also seen a massive rise in primary school enrolment with 29million
more kids in Tanzania alone going to school.
“Many countries in sub-Saharan Africa and many countries in South Asia, where
poverty rates are still deplorable, is where we believe aid should primarily
be channelled.
“Health and agriculture are proven paths to improving standards of living.
“Aid is not entirely the answer. We know we need to lift up people
economically through more investment, fair trade policies and enforcement of
laws.
“But aid helps them progress to a more prosperous future.
“Now aid programmes have strong systems of oversight to ensure the money goes
to the people who most need it.
“Aid organisations will seriously investigate any allegations of corruption.
“I don’t agree with people who say countries become dependent on overseas aid.
“A sick person can’t go to work and a farmer whose crop output lags behind his
competitors year after year needs aid. When he becomes more productive it
will help the economy.
“We have seen the UK being a leader in how you programme aid so it breaks the
cycle of poverty and dependence.
“In the 1950s and 1960s South Korea was a big aid recipient and now has a
billion-dollar aid programme.
“Japan also became one of the most important powerhouses thanks to aid, and
Africa now has six of the top ten fastest growing economies in the world.
“Aid isn’t the answer, but it creates a climate where countries can start to prosper.”