Letters | 10 January 2013

The aid argument

Sir: ‘The great aid mystery’ (5 January) presents the development sceptics’ case — which in five years in opposition (2005-2010) the Conservative party set out to address head on.

Although the huge changes in British development policy over the last two and half years appear to have eluded Messrs Foreman and Shaw, they are real and fundamental and genuinely provide grounds upon which most people on either side of the debate can camp. I learned in two-and-a-half years as Britain’s Development Secretary that both the extremes in this debate have deaf ears.

The coalition government has reduced the number of aid recipient countries supported by Britain from 43 to 28. We demanded results as the only justification for handing over hard-pressed British taxpayers’ cash. We set up the independent — and often uncomfortable for government — evaluation of British aid. To call this ‘PR flim flam’ reveals an unusual lack of journalistic objectivity. And the coalition reduced by half (half, Mr Foreman) the level of general budget support and massively tightened the rules and regulations affecting its disbursement.

At the centre of British Development Policy is tackling conflict and promoting wealth creation. Ninety per cent of all jobs come not from government but from the private sector. This is a real investment by Britain in our children’s future prosperity and security and it is being accomplished at less than 1 per cent of our GNI.

The sceptics question the results. How about the 11 million children in school who wouldn’t be there but for Britain’s generosity? The clean water secured for as many people as live in the UK thanks to our taxpayers? A child was vaccinated every two seconds throughout this Parliament and a child’s life saved every two minutes from diseases that none of our children die from.