Sustainable Development Goals
Andrew Mitchell Excerpts(11 years ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Mary Creagh
Perhaps my hon. Friends were writing their speeches. I know that my hon. Friend the Member for East Lothian (Fiona O'Donnell) is planning to speak in this debate. I pay tribute to the work of the Select Committee, which the right hon. Gentleman chairs, and I shall quote extensively from some of his reports, if he will give me the chance.
Mary Creagh
I am going to make my point, and this will interest the right hon. Gentleman because it is a body that he set up. The Independent Commission for Aid Impact has been highly critical of the Secretary of State’s TradeMark Southern Africa programme. It found that an £80,000 illegal payment was made to the Government of Zimbabwe in breach of the Government’s own rules.
Justine Greening
As the hon. Lady knows, I was happy to give evidence to the Committee, because that is a key part of the SDGs that we need to get right. She will know that within the broader international development agenda we have tightened up our work, including with the World Bank, in terms of the projects that we are prepared to sign off on, so we are not investing in those fossil fuels unless there is no alternative for the poorest countries in the world to be able to get the energy they so desperately need to help them start to move down the road to development.
The UK Government have one of the proudest records of any development aid donor, both in delivering real results for the poorest people in the poorest countries and in shaping the international consensus around what matters most. Let us consider our record for one moment. We are the first country to reach the 0.7% of GNI spent on aid target—something that we promised to do for many years, and done by this Government. Our Prime Minister led the world, hosting the summit in 2011, supporting the global alliance for vaccines and immunisation, saving the lives of millions of children. Just yesterday, the world agreed to commit a further $7.5 billion to continue the important work of GAVI, or the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunisation, from 2016 to 2020. In response to the UK’s pledge of £1 billion, Bill Gates, co-chair of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, said:
“The UK’s generous pledge to Gavi—which will save around 1.4 million children’s lives by 2020—is another example of how Britain invests in development solutions that provide value for money and real impact. The UK has been instrumental in helping to mobilise the international community to give generously to Gavi. The people of Britain should be proud of their huge contribution in creating a world that is healthier, more stable and increasingly prosperous.”
I wonder whether he would be confused by the tone that the shadow Minister has taken.
Mr Andrew Mitchell
Would my right hon. Friend like to reflect on the fact that because of the decisions made by the whole of the House of Commons in respect of the GAVI replenishment in 2011, throughout the five years of this Parliament a child will have been vaccinated every two seconds and a child’s life saved every two minutes from diseases that none of our children, thank goodness, die from in Britain?
Justine Greening
My right hon. Friend is absolutely right. He will know that in addition, the pledge that we made yesterday has increased our level of support for GAVI even further. The fund is not just able now to deliver vaccination and immunisation for those children; in the case of Ebola it can play a real role in stepping up to help us to combat new emerging diseases and health threats as well, so it has a much broader and more strategic impact on global health security than anyone could possibly have realised when it was being set up. It is also, critically, a model that pulls in the private sector, and allows drugs to get to children in a way that would never have been possible if we had not pulled together those different parties to work for one common goal with countries that have a common strategy on immunisation. It is incredibly important and we will continue to support it.
Our Prime Minister has led global summits in London—in 2012 on family planning and in 2013 on nutrition and combating stunting. In 2014 I was immensely proud to work with him on the Girl summit, where we catalysed a global movement to eradicate female genital mutilation and early and forced child marriage. It was a pleasure to be able to go back to Walworth academy last week to talk to people there about some of the progress that we have made over the past six months since that conference and the key role that they were able to play in ensuring that it was such a success. That focus on girls’ rights came on top of the global summit that my right hon. Friend the Member for Richmond (Yorks) (Mr Hague), now Leader of the House, organised to prevent sexual violence in conflict.
We will use this proud record and the credibility it brings us on the world stage to argue unashamedly for a post-2015 development agenda that works as a clear strategy for eradicating poverty, leaving no one behind and achieving sustainable development.
Dame Tessa Jowell
I have only six minutes. I will use that time to make a specific point. The shadow Secretary of State, my hon. Friend the Member for Wakefield (Mary Creagh), dealt very well with the progress that has been made.
Mr Mitchell
The right hon. Lady is absolutely right to talk about scrutiny, but will she at least give this Government credit for setting up the Independent Commission for Aid Impact and for the transparency initiative? That initiative ushered in a new era of transparency, which was a first not only for a British Department of State, but for any European country.
International Development (Official Development Assistance Target) Bill
Andrew Mitchell Excerpts(11 years, 2 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Mr Andrew Mitchell (Sutton Coldfield) (Con)
I will not detain the House for long, but I want to add my congratulations to my right hon. Friend the Member for Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk (Michael Moore) on piloting this Bill through the House so skilfully. I also want to say that it is a matter of huge pride to many of us in the House and to our constituents that this Bill will, we hope, reach the statute book before too long. It puts into operation a promise that all the three main parties in this House have made to the public. It is not only the right thing to do, but it is hugely in Britain’s national interests. It not only makes some of the poorest people in the world more secure, safer and less conflict-ridden; it also helps to make them more prosperous, and it does the same thing for Britain, too—it makes us safer and more prosperous in the long term. It is a huge investment in the future lives of our children and grandchildren.
The one point I want to emphasise is that passing a Bill like this in this House places a strong obligation on us to ensure that the taxpayer is getting value for money: that we are delivering these results on the ground; that when we take a pound of hard-earned taxpayer’s money, we really do deliver 100 pence of value.
I have some sympathy with the comments that some of my hon. Friends made about value for money and the importance of the Independent Commission for Aid Impact. As the Minister just said, the ICAI is the right body to tell the public—the taxpayer—whether the money is being well spent. We made a commitment in opposition to set up an independent commission, and we did so after the election when we were in government. Many voices from the civil service and the international development community urged us not to set it up, but we did so. As I know, it is an uncomfortable experience for Ministers to see its findings, but this was the right thing to do. In deciding to pass the Bill today, this House must acknowledge that the other side of the coin is to accept independent evaluation from a body reporting to Parliament, the legislature, not to Ministers in the Executive, to ensure that the money is being well spent.
Britain is a brilliant exponent of international development. We are very good at it, but when we get it wrong we must put our hands up, and we must have the self-confidence to accept the discipline of independent evaluation by the ICAI. The commission is very well run by Graham Ward and his fellow commissioners, John Githongo, Mark Foster and Diana Good. They have already done a great job, and we must have the confidence in ourselves in order to have the confidence in them to ensure that the ICAI is now a permanent part of the international development architecture.
International Development (Official Development Assistance Target) Bill
Andrew Mitchell Excerpts(11 years, 4 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Mr Andrew Mitchell (Sutton Coldfield) (Con)
I am a co-sponsor of the Bill introduced by my right hon. Friend the Member for Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk (Michael Moore). With the exception of one very minor tweak, it encapsulates the wishes of all three major political parties in the commitments we made at the last election.
At this very dangerous time in international affairs, I want to start by expressing heartfelt gratitude for the bravery and selflessness of those who work in the humanitarian and development world, increasingly placing themselves in personal danger and jeopardy to help those less fortunate than themselves. In this House we often pay tribute to the extraordinary bravery of our armed forces, and rightly so, but I wish today to salute this vital and selfless work, and the bravery and commitment that is being shown by British members of the humanitarian and development community around the world in some desperate and difficult places. Over the past few years, large numbers of them have been harmed, kidnapped, brutalised and killed as they seek to help those caught up in conflict, violence, deep insecurity and poverty. They are heroes of our time.
Over some seven and a half years in government and in opposition, as the shadow Development Secretary and then Development Secretary, I have had the privilege of working with some of Britain’s leading non-governmental organisations. They are world leaders, and this House should never forget the brilliant work that they are doing, day in and day out, in very insecure places.
The commitment to 0.7% is an all-party commitment. I remind my Conservative colleagues that page 117 of our 2010 manifesto said:
“We will legislate in the first session of a new Parliament to lock in this level of spending for every year from 2013.”
We all understand the reasons why that was not possible in the first Session, but we have a chance to do it now.
Mr Mitchell
I will in a moment, but I want to make some progress first.
On page 116 of the manifesto there is a very fetching picture of my hon. Friend the Member for Harlow (Robert Halfon) teaching in Rwanda on Project Umubano. I was teaching in the classroom next door and my hon. Friend the Member for Mid Derbyshire (Pauline Latham), my right hon. Friend the Member for Horsham (Mr Maude) and my hon. Friend the Member for Stafford (Jeremy Lefroy) were also teaching. The Minister of State, Department for International Development, my right hon. Friend the Member for New Forest West (Mr Swayne), was not far away in Butare at the time.
The former Prime Minister, the right hon. Member for Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath (Mr Brown), made a powerful speech today. He talked about David in the genocide memorial in Kigali, which has been visited by hundreds of Conservatives on Project Umubano who were as moved as the right hon. Gentleman was to see it. That is part of the way in which the commitment to international development has grown across the House, which is very welcome indeed.
I do not like declaratory legislation and fully understand why many Members believe that it is insulting and that it diminishes the House of Commons, because it implies that we cannot be trusted to do what we say we will do and that we therefore have to satisfy the public by enshrining it in law. Of course, former Prime Minister Tony Blair passed declaratory legislation to abolish child poverty, but child poverty then immediately went up. I therefore understand why declaratory legislation is frowned upon in this House, but this is different: we have reached 0.7%. As the former Prime Minister, the right hon. Member for Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath, said, we have ascended the mountain and reached the top. We should all be incredibly proud, particularly on the Conservative Benches, that it was a Conservative-led Government who introduced and honoured this commitment to the poorest in the world at an extremely difficult time in our own economic affairs.
The great and important point about the 0.7% is that it gives certainty to budgetary methods and budgets in the Department for International Development. That matters a lot: it means we can plan for the long term, for reasons I will come on to. It also reflects the state of the economy, because it is predicated on the gross national income, and it gives certainty to planning.
A report on international development by the House of Lords Economic Affairs Committee—a most senior Committee in Parliament—praised almost everything this Government are doing, but complained about the 0.7% because it is an input. It is right that we should be obsessed with outputs—the results and what this money is achieving. Nevertheless, this particular input is the exception, because it enables us to plan future international development spend with certainty.
Mr Swayne
I feel it is important at this moment to put on the record the work of my right hon. Friend. The growth in consensus across the House, particularly on the Conservative Benches, is undoubtedly a result of the work he did in opposition with respect to Project Umubano and the work he did as Secretary of State.
Mr Mitchell
My right hon. Friend is extremely generous.
In return for this extraordinarily favourable arrangement for British development policy, we have to honour the electorate by ensuring that we demonstrate that we really do secure the results that we promise—that for every pound of their hard-earned money, we really do secure 100p of development on the ground. That is why this Government have conducted multilateral and bilateral aid reviews, to ensure that we can demonstrate to the public that this money is really well spent.
Philip Davies
My right hon. Friend keeps talking about how we should spend our money, but he might have noticed that we have not got any money. What he is actually asking us to do is borrow billions of pounds to pass on to other countries. The actual cost to the taxpayer is even more than 0.7% because we have to pay interest—
Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Lindsay Hoyle)
Order. I am sure the hon. Gentleman will want time to speak as well. May I just remind everybody that there are 16 speakers to come? I know, Mr Davies, that you will wish to contribute and I want you to save that part of your speech for later. I am not knocking it, but there are 16 Members who want to speak. I just want to try to help to make sure that you get in as well.
Mr Mitchell
I will come in a moment to the point raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Shipley (Philip Davies).
I want to briefly mention three particularly important points. First, on vaccinations, which have been mentioned, Britain has taken a leadership role. Throughout its course, this Parliament will vaccinate a child in the poorest parts of the world every two seconds and save the life of a child every two minutes by protecting them against diseases that none of our children, thank goodness, die from.
Secondly, on family planning, which is also championed by Britain, as a result of the initiative to crowd in other countries with their support and taxpayers’ funds, we will, over the next six years, be able to reduce by half the number of poor women in the world who want access to contraception and family planning but are not able to get it.
Thirdly—this was also mentioned by the former Prime Minister, the right hon. Member for Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath—it is absolutely critical to get girls into school. It is the opinion of many of us that that is the way to change the world for the better. The right hon. Gentleman mentioned Sudan. Today a girl born in Sudan is more likely to die in childbirth than to complete her primary school education. This Government, with all-party support, have introduced the girls’ education challenge fund, designed to ensure that 1 million girls in the most difficult parts of the world get an education.
Those are world-changing actions which have been championed by Britain through a policy that is not the property of any one political party. It is not a Conservative, Labour or Liberal policy—it is a British policy and I believe that increasingly, our constituents champion that.
Greg Mulholland (Leeds North West) (LD)
I, too, pay tribute to the role my right hon. Friend played when he was an International Development Secretary of whom I think we were all very proud. Does he agree that, despite some of the dissenting, rather depressing voices suggesting that this is some form of charity, this is actually about investment in a safer, fairer, more stable world, which is clearly in this country’s interest?
Mr Mitchell
My hon. Friend is absolutely correct: this is an investment in tackling conflict, building prosperity, promoting good governance and tackling poverty. That is what the development budget does. In that respect, the UK is a world leader. Our security and stability in this country are assured not only by our brilliant armed forces, but by training the police in Afghanistan, building up governance structures in the middle east and getting girls in the horn of Africa into school. All those things make us safer and more secure in this country. It is hugely in our national interest and that is what the development budget is spent on.
One example that is worth mentioning is Somalia. Britain intervened to try to do something about the appalling famine that took place there in 2011. By crowding in the regional powers, the different parties in Somalia and the great powers at the United Nations to a conference in London, we tried to ensure that that benighted country—some of the most ungoverned space in the world—could develop some sort of order. Whisper it not too loudly, but after so many failed international attempts during the past 20 years, progress is being made in Somalia. It is another example of development policy that is helping people in one of the most benighted countries in the world, and also helping our security and stability in Britain.
In looking at the problems in northern Nigeria, Mali, Libya, Somalia, Iraq and Syria, we can all accept that although there may be a need for smart weapons delivered from 12,000 feet, people are responsive to the smart policies of tackling corruption and of building accountability and good governance, and UK development spending contributes to all those things.
When it comes to building prosperity, at one level our work has helped the poorest in the world through microfinance and, at the top level, the important reforms of the CDC have made it far more accountable and far better at delivering development objectives through the deployment of patient capital and pioneer capital. The significance of that very important reform will increasingly be seen. Under its new chairman, Graham Wrigley, and its outstanding chief executive, Diana Noble, the CDC is once again giving a lead around the world in tackling poverty.
One area where I agree with the Minister—I know that the Bill’s promoter is absolutely receptive to this point—is that the Independent Commission for Aid Impact is the right mechanism to ensure accountability. Under its chairman, Graham Ward, it has done an excellent job. It is a vital addition to the development architecture. ICAI is not a comfortable organisation for Ministers, as I fully recall. It reports not to Ministers, who are able to sweep inconvenient truths under the carpet, but to the International Development Committee. My right hon. Friend the Member for Gordon (Sir Malcolm Bruce) and his Committee colleagues have shown themselves to be fearless in pursuing the Government when alerted to difficulties by the independent commission. ICAI can deliver precisely what my right hon. Friend wants to see in the Bill, and what the House wishes to endorse.
Mr Andrew Lansley (South Cambridgeshire) (Con)
I confess that I cannot see why the Independent Commission for Aid Impact should not be given statutory backing. I therefore hope that when the Bill is further considered, it might be possible, in clause 5, simply to give statutory backing to what has been created as ICAI.
Mr Mitchell
My right hon. Friend makes an interesting point. Of course, ICAI was created through an Order in Council. There have been discussions about placing it on a statutory basis, and I think that it should be, because it has earned such a position. He may want to speak to our right hon. Friend the Minister for the Cabinet Office and Paymaster General, whom I am sure he will find receptive.
Let us pass the Bill and take development spending out of party politics. The Bill reflects our values as a country and our desire to help the least well-off. It is also hugely in our national interest, which is the answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Shipley (Philip Davies) and my other hon. Friends on the dissident Bench. The Bill is hugely in our national interest, and it is an investment in greater security and prosperity for us all and in the future of our children and of generations to come.
Sir Edward Leigh
On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. The debate will soon have been going on for two hours. Before the proponents of the Bill move the closure, you will want to have at least one speech against it, will you not?
Rwanda Budget Support
Andrew Mitchell Excerpts(13 years, 5 months ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for International Development (Mr Andrew Mitchell)
Following my visit to the Kivus region of the Democratic Republic of Congo in July, I delayed the disbursement of general budget support (GBS) to Rwanda because of concerns about the impact of the conflict on civilians in the region and reports of Rwandan involvement in the M23 mutiny. At this time I sought assurances from President Kagame that Rwanda was adhering to the strict partnership principles around GBS, which I strengthened in the summer of 2011.
Rwanda has engaged constructively with the peace process initiated through an international conference on the Great Lakes region and there is a continuing ceasefire in the Kivus. Given this progress and recognising that the Government of Rwanda have continued to demonstrate their strong commitment to reducing poverty and improving their financial management, Britain will partially restore its general budget support to Rwanda. We will now disburse half (£8 million) of the delayed GBS tranche and will re-programme the remaining £8 million. This decision reflects our responsibility to protect the poor, but also caution as concerns remain over Rwanda’s involvement with the M23 rebels. The re-allocated money will be directly channelled to programmes for education and food security, to ensure that the poorest people in Rwanda are not hurt by this change. It will put over 60,000 more Rwandan children into primary school, half of whom will be girls, and increase production of key food security crops by an estimated 5,130 metric tonnes.
There are still concerns that Rwanda could do more to meet our joint partnership principles in full. This is the first of two budget support payments scheduled for the financial year 2012-13. The next disbursement is due in December 2012. A decision on that disbursement will be made in due course. The UK will continue to closely monitor the Government of Rwanda’s role in bringing about peace in the eastern DRC region.
Oral Answers to Questions
Andrew Mitchell Excerpts(13 years, 6 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Stephen Timms (East Ham) (Lab)
2. What progress he has made on enshrining in law spending on international development equal to 0.7% of gross national income; and if he will make a statement.
The Secretary of State for International Development (Mr Andrew Mitchell)
The 0.7 Bill is ready and is with the business managers. As the Prime Minister has said, the coalition Government will introduce the Bill when parliamentary time allows.
Stephen Timms
I am grateful to the Secretary of State for that answer. There was widespread dismay that the Bill was not included in the Queen’s Speech. Why has the commitment made in the coalition agreement not so far been fulfilled?
Mr Mitchell
The commitment was referred to in the Gracious Speech. The most important thing is to get on and fulfil the commitment, which has been made on both sides of the House and by all parties, to give development aid equal to 0.7% of our gross national income. That is what we are doing. The right hon. Gentleman makes a fair point. We must get on with the legislation. As soon as the business managers say that there is a slot, we will take it.
Sir Alan Haselhurst (Saffron Walden) (Con)
To those who continue to doubt whether, in this time of austerity, we should stick to our eminently worthwhile target, is it not worth pointing out that 99.3% of gross national income will still be available for all other purposes?
Mr Mitchell
My right hon. Friend makes an extremely good point. Many Members will agree that under 1% of gross national income is an incredibly good investment in the future prosperity and security of the countries in which we work as well as in Britain’s prosperity and security.
Mr Ivan Lewis (Bury South) (Lab)
I say to the Secretary of State that we can get on with it. My hon. Friend the Member for Preston (Mark Hendrick) has tabled a private Member’s Bill that would enshrine the 0.7% commitment in law. It has all-party support and is consistent with promises made in all three main parties’ election manifestos and the coalition agreement. The Secretary of State is fully aware that the success of private Members’ Bills depends on Government support. Will he confirm that that support will be forthcoming? If not, why not?
Mr Mitchell
I share the hon. Gentleman’s interest in a potential private Member’s Bill, but for the Government to comment on the Bill it will be necessary for the hon. Member concerned to publish it in the Table Office.
Mr Lewis
The Secretary of State is fully aware that my hon. Friend offered to take the Secretary of State’s Bill and use it as the basis of his private Member’s Bill, so let us get on with it.
Enshrining the 0.7% commitment in law is only one way of fulfilling our obligation to the world’s poor. Can the Secretary of State explain why he has done nothing to stop measures in the Finance Bill that will enable UK multinational companies to avoid paying approximately £4 billion in tax to developing countries? That could be called legalising tax dodging. Is he concerned that his Government’s legacy will be to increase aid dependency by reducing self-sufficiency in many developing countries?
Mr Mitchell
The hon. Gentleman is referring to the controlled foreign companies provisions of the Finance Bill and the ActionAid campaign on them. There have been discussions between Treasury officials and ActionAid, and there is significant disagreement about the effect of those measures.
Jo Swinson (East Dunbartonshire) (LD)
I warmly welcome the coalition Government’s commitment to spend 0.7% of gross national income on international development, particularly to help us make progress towards the millennium development goal on reducing maternal deaths, which we are furthest from achieving. Will the Secretary of State outline how UK aid money will be spent to save the lives of women and girls in light of today’s excellent family planning summit, where global leadership is being shown?
Mr Mitchell
My hon. Friend is entirely right to underline the fact that the coalition Government have put girls and women right at the centre of everything we do in development. She refers to the family planning summit, which the British Government are co-hosting with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. That summit has the power, if successful, to reduce by half the number of women in the poor world who want access to contraception but do not have it.
Mr Gregory Campbell (East Londonderry) (DUP)
As the UK emerges—hopefully—from recession over the next two or three years, 0.7% of GNI will represent a significant increase in spending. What is the Secretary of State doing to ensure that UK citizens see value for money?
Mr Mitchell
The hon. Gentleman rightly identifies the importance of being able to demonstrate to hard-pressed taxpayers that every pound of their hard-earned money is really delivering 100p of value on the ground. That is exactly what the Government are doing in the case of development policy. The 0.7% commitment to which the hon. Gentleman refers reflects the state of the economy, because the spending figure will go up and down with economic health. Many of us think that is what it should do.
Jason McCartney (Colne Valley) (Con)
3. What humanitarian support his Department is providing for Syrian refugees; and if he will make a statement.
The Secretary of State for International Development (Mr Andrew Mitchell)
On 1 March we announced a doubling of British aid to Burma. We are supporting the World Bank in conducting an assessment of the development opportunities there following the remarkable changes which Aung San Suu Kyi underlined in her historic visit to Westminster last month.
Yasmin Qureshi
For the first time in decades, positive changes in Burma offer hope to refugees to return home. What is the Secretary of State’s Department doing to encourage them to return to Burma?
Mr Mitchell
We are engaged in Kachin and Rakhine states, both of which are receiving British humanitarian support. I can also announce today that a team of Members of this House, under the Westminster Foundation for Democracy, will be visiting the Burmese Parliament in Naypyidaw later this month.
Mr David Burrowes (Enfield, Southgate) (Con)
Despite the signs of hope, I am sure that the Secretary of State will share my concern about the recent reports of human rights abuses in Kachin state—Christians being persecuted, women being gang raped and internally displaced persons camps becoming pools of prey for human trafficking. Can he assure me that international aid with robust human rights protection will reach the Kachin people?
Mr Mitchell
My hon. Friend identifies a matter of great concern in Kachin. We have set aside £2 million for humanitarian support there, of which some £1.2 million has already been allocated.
Tessa Munt (Wells) (LD)
T1. If he will make a statement on his departmental responsibilities.
The Secretary of State for International Development (Mr Andrew Mitchell)
At the weekend, I represented the Government at the Afghanistan summit in Tokyo, at which Britain made long-term pledges to support the development of Afghanistan and called on the rest of the international community to do the same. Today, the British Government and the Gates Foundation are co-hosting a global summit that aims to cut by half the number of women in developing countries who want access to contraception but cannot get it. [Interruption.]
Mr Speaker
Order. I understand hon. Members’ excited anticipation of Prime Minister’s questions, but we are discussing extremely serious matters and it would be a courtesy to those people affected and to hon. Members if there were a reasonable level of decorum.
Tessa Munt
Thank you, Mr Speaker. What opportunities exist for pushing for financial transparency worldwide, including budgetary transparency and transparency in natural resource management? Will my right hon. Friend’s Department seek to promote financial transparency initiatives such as GIFT—the Global Initiative for Fiscal Transparency?
Mr Mitchell
My hon. Friend identifies transparency as a most important aspect of development, and it is why Britain was a key leader at the launch and implementation of the international aid transparency initiative, and we continue to work hard with partners all around the world to ensure that the emphasis on transparency and good spending that was championed at the Busan conference in November continues.
Rushanara Ali (Bethnal Green and Bow) (Lab)
Today the Government are hosting an important summit on family planning, which we welcome. However, the brutal murder last weekend by the Taliban of an Afghan woman for adultery shows that women’s rights and freedoms remain elusive goals. Does the Secretary of State agree that the credibility of the summit will depend on women’s human rights being at the heart of the actions that follow it?
Mr Mitchell
I thank the hon. Lady for her question. The summit is about ensuring that women have the ability to choose whether and when they have children, and the spacing in between their children. We need to keep the focus of the summit on that issue. She will have heard the Government’s strong condemnation of the Taliban’s execution in Afghanistan. We set up the Tawanmandi fund last year specifically to empower women in the areas that the hon. Lady describes, and its work is ongoing. Three quarters of the grants from the fund have gone to organisations involved in protecting women.
Glyn Davies (Montgomeryshire) (Con)
T2. Conditions in Afghanistan after the external forces leave are becoming a matter of increasing importance to us. Will my right hon. Friend update the House on the outcomes of the Tokyo summit on Afghanistan that he attended at the weekend?
Mr Mitchell
The Tokyo summit was essentially a grand bargain between members of the international community to ensure that funding and support will continue through 2015 to 2017, and indeed throughout the decade of transformation to 2025. In return for that, the Government of Afghanistan need to continue to place a strong emphasis on governance reforms and economic reforms.
Helen Jones (Warrington North) (Lab)
T3. We have just marked the first anniversary of the creation of South Sudan, but 1 million people there require food aid, and along the border the situation is even worse, with between 15% and 22% of under-fives suffering from malnutrition. Will the Secretary of State ensure that the United Kingdom’s response targets the needs of those children, who are the future of that struggling country?
Mr Mitchell
The hon. Lady rightly identifies the plight of the many people caught up in that conflict. A girl born today in South Sudan is more likely to die while having a baby than to complete her primary school education. However, the position on the border, particularly in Abyei, is now easing, and there are some signs of optimism in the direct negotiations that are taking place between South Sudan and Khartoum.
Martin Horwood (Cheltenham) (LD)
Will the Secretary of State join me in applauding the strong lead being given by the UK in the arms treaty negotiations in New York and, in particular, our support for provisions that will allow legitimate arms sales but discourage wholly disproportionate spending on arms that is detrimental to sustainable development?
Mr Mitchell
Yes. My hon. Friend identifies an important point. There is strong support on both sides of this House for the arms trade treaty. The Minister of State, my right hon. Friend the Member for Rutland and Melton (Mr Duncan) will be going to New York to take part in those negotiations, and it is interesting to note that, even in the defence industry in Britain, there is strong support for a level playing field and for transparency in the sale of weapons.
Kelvin Hopkins (Luton North) (Lab)
T6. I have another question about South Sudan. Thousands of children there are dying of diarrhoea. What are the Government doing to help with this urgent need, and will other countries be urged to help as well?
Mr Mitchell
The hon. Gentleman accurately identifies the position of children in South Sudan, which I set out in answer to his hon. Friend the Member for Warrington North (Helen Jones). It is true that diarrhoea needlessly kills thousands upon thousands of children every day. That is one of the reasons why last year Britain led the replenishment for GAVI—the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunisation—so that Britain will be vaccinating a child in the poor world every two seconds and saving the life of a child every two minutes, precisely from these sorts of ills.
Mr Sam Gyimah (East Surrey) (Con)
T4. Further to my visit to Helmand with the International Development Committee, I would like to pay tribute to the hard work and dedication of our forces and DFID staff operating in extremely difficult circumstances. The Secretary of State is aware of the shocking execution in Afghanistan a week ago of a 22-year-old woman accused of adultery. What are the Government doing to mitigate the risk of a return to Taliban-style treatment of women in Afghanistan, post our withdrawal in 2014?
Mr Mitchell
The Government vigorously condemned the execution to which my hon. Friend referred. One of the key ways of transforming Afghan society to prevent the return of the Taliban’s evil practices is, of course, to get girls into school. When they are a critical mass, that will have a big effect on Afghan society. Nine years ago, there were no girls in school in Afghanistan; today, there are nearly 2.5 million.
Departmental Annual Report and Accounts
Andrew Mitchell Excerpts(13 years, 7 months ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for International Development (Mr Andrew Mitchell)
I have today published and laid before Parliament, the Department for International Development’s annual report and accounts for the year 2011-12.
The report covers DFID’s activities during 2011-12 in line with the International Development (Reporting and Transparency) Act 2006 and includes a full set of accounts for 2011-12. The report has been placed in the Libraries of the House of Commons and House of Lords for the reference of Members and copies will be made available in the Vote Office. It is also available online on DFID’s website (www.dfid.gov.uk).
The annual report contains results which are both clear and quantifiable. This has been possible because for the first time, this Government have established systems which allow us to measure and track, in detail, the results which UK aid is achieving.
Over the last two years aid from Britain has quite simply transformed the lives of millions in the world’s poorest countries. This has included:
vaccinating over 12 million children against preventable diseases;
improving the land and property rights of 1.1 million people;
supporting 5.3 million children (2.5 million of them girls) to go to primary school;
distributing 12.2 million bednets to protect people against malaria;
supporting 26 African countries to agree an Africa free trade area;
enabling 11.9 million people to work their way out of poverty by providing access to financial services;
preventing 2.7 million children and pregnant women from going hungry;
reaching 6 million people with emergency food assistance;
supporting freer and fairer elections in five countries;
improving hygiene conditions for 7.4 million people.
These results show what British aid can achieve. It is time that aid funded by the British people is easily and clearly identified as coming from the UK.
For that reason, I am today launching a new UK aid logo which we intend, in future, to apply to things like emergency grain packets, buildings and pumps. The logo features the Union flag and will be instantly recognisable across the world. The logo has been designed in-house at no additional cost to the taxpayer and will be introduced gradually as existing stocks run down.
Both the annual report and our new logo are testament to the extraordinary results which British aid is achieving. They are results of which this House and this country can be proud.
Oral Answers to Questions
Andrew Mitchell Excerpts(13 years, 8 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Guto Bebb (Aberconwy) (Con)
1. What assessment he has made of the effectiveness of aid provided to the Occupied Palestinian Territories.
The Secretary of State for International Development (Mr Andrew Mitchell)
Both the Minister of State, who is today attending the Friends of Yemen meeting in Riyadh, and I keep a close eye on the effectiveness of our programme in the Occupied Palestinian Territories.
Guto Bebb
I thank the Minister for his response. On a trip to Israel and the west bank earlier this year, I saw education materials that incited violence and the use of Palestinian Authority broadcast media to glorify conflict, not least relating to a group of children singing about the aim to saturate their land with blood. Will the Secretary of State provide assurances that our aid donations do not contribute towards such incitement? Will he highlight what steps the Government are taking to deter the Palestinian Authority from supporting such publications and broadcasts?
Mr Mitchell
I can give my hon. Friend that assurance. I would be very interested to see the material he describes. I can tell him that numerous credible studies show no evidence of incitement or anti-Semitism in Palestinian Authority textbooks, so if he ensures that we get a copy of what he has seen, we will take the appropriate action.
Richard Burden (Birmingham, Northfield) (Lab)
Has the International Development Secretary joined the Foreign Secretary and, curiously, the Education Secretary in meeting Israeli Foreign Minister Lieberman during his visit to the UK? Irrespective of whether he meets him, will the right hon. Gentleman transmit to the Israeli Foreign Minister the concerns of the United Nations Assistant Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Deputy Emergency Relief Co-ordinator, who visited the west bank last week and said:
“I am extremely concerned about the humanitarian impact of demolitions and displacement on Palestinian families. Such actions cause great human suffering, run counter to international law and must be brought to a halt”?
Mr Mitchell
I do not have any current plans to meet the Foreign Minister from Israel, although I met a series of Israeli Foreign Ministers when I was there just before Christmas. I will ensure that the hon. Gentleman’s comments are passed on to the Foreign Secretary.
Sir Bob Russell (Colchester) (LD)
I also visited the west bank and East Jerusalem last year and I saw the consequences of ethnic cleansing and apartheid. Will the Secretary of State assure us that Church groups will be urged to get the Government of Israel to follow the parable of the Good Samaritan?
Mr Mitchell
I raised the issue of religious tolerance when I visited the west bank and Israel at the end of last year. The hon. Gentleman’s comments will have been heard by the Foreign Office, which I have no doubt will pursue them.
Mr Andy Slaughter (Hammersmith) (Lab)
We need to focus on the real issue of aid, not on red herrings about its misuse by the Palestinians. The fact is that Israel has blockaded Gaza and the checkpoints in the west bank are stifling any attempt by the British Government to bring aid to the Palestinians. What is the Secretary of State doing to make the Israelis co-operate in respect of the aid that Britain and the EU gives to the Palestinians?
Mr Mitchell
Britain has an extremely well-targeted aid and development programme in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. It focuses on building the capacity of the Palestinian Authority to provide good government and support for the two-state solution. It focuses, too, on wealth creation and economic growth, which are important. The third strand principally supports the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, and ensures that we fulfil our humanitarian responsibilities. The programme is very well placed, and we make certain that it achieves all three of those things effectively.
Mr Matthew Offord (Hendon) (Con)
The next generation of Palestinian peacemakers and state builders are too frequently exposed to messages of hate and violence rather than of peaceful co-existence. What measures are in place to ensure that aid is used to teach mutual understanding and reconciliation?
Mr Mitchell
My hon. Friend makes an important point. A recent study was set up by the Americans to look at the content of textbooks and teaching both in Israel and in the west bank for precisely the reason that he sets out. We take this issue very seriously. I will ensure that my hon. Friend receives a copy of that report when it is published.
Dr Eilidh Whiteford (Banff and Buchan) (SNP)
Control of international arms transfers is essential to the effectiveness of aid-related conflict resolution measures in the occupied territories and other places. The UK has a key role to play at the UN arms trade treaty negotiations next month. Will the Secretary of State—
Chris Kelly (Dudley South) (Con)
2. What support his Department provides for clean water and sanitation in developing countries.
The Secretary of State for International Development (Mr Andrew Mitchell)
The British Government consider that access to clean water, sanitation and hygiene is among the most basic of human needs. At the recent summit in Washington, I announced this Government’s intention to double the commitment on water and sanitation that we made last year.
Chris Kelly
I welcome the Department’s commitment to doubling the provision of water and sanitation so that it reaches 60 million people, but will my right hon. Friend assure me that sufficient priority is now being given to sanitation? Too often in the past, priority has been given solely to the provision of clean water.
Mr Mitchell
My hon. Friend is entirely right to draw attention to the importance of sanitation. That is why the International Development Committee called its report on these matters “Sanitation and Clean Water” rather than referring to WASH—water, sanitation and hygiene. As he says, for every UK citizen we will provide clean water or sanitation for someone in the poor world who does not have it today. That is an important priority for Members on both sides of the House, and Britain is honouring it.
Mr Gregory Campbell (East Londonderry) (DUP)
The Secretary of State will be aware of the tremendous work done by charities such as Excellent Development which supply clean water to many regions in Kenya and Uganda at a fraction of the normal cost. Will he ensure that the Government do what they can to assist such tremendous and cost-effective work?
Mr Mitchell
We make it an absolute priority to ensure that British taxpayers’ money goes as far as it possibly can, and that we secure 100p of delivery on the ground for every pound that we spend. We continue to ensure that we deliver clean water and sanitation at the lowest possible price.
Amber Rudd (Hastings and Rye) (Con)
3. What recent assessment he has made of the humanitarian situation in the Sahel.
Gregg McClymont (Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East) (Lab)
4. Whether the Government plan to spend 0.7% of gross national income on official development assistance by 2013.
Gregg McClymont
The Minister’s answer is welcome, but given the Government’s failure, in what is a rather thin legislative programme, to embed that 0.7% investment in law, can he give a guarantee that there will be the same level of investment in those less fortunate than ourselves in 2014 and 2015?
Mr Mitchell
The Government have been very clear, as have all Members of the House, about our commitment to the poorest in the world and not to balance the books on the backs of the least fortunate. We are the first Government ever to set out clearly how we will meet our 0.7% commitment. On the hon. Gentleman’s specific point about the law, the Bill in question has been drafted, the Prime Minister and I have said that it will proceed, and it rests with the business managers to decide the date for that.
Mr James Gray (North Wiltshire) (Con)
Does the Secretary of State agree that in response to those who, rather facilely, argue that charity should begin at home and that we should not be spending this money, it should be pointed out that not only do we have a moral obligation to people around the world who are less fortunate than ourselves, but we are spending the money firmly in Britain’s best strategic interests?
Mr Mitchell
My hon. Friend makes an excellent point. For a spend of less than 1% of gross national income, we are investing in our future prosperity and our security, as well as doing the right thing by the least fortunate in the world.
Helen Goodman (Bishop Auckland) (Lab)
5. What programmes his Department has put in place to improve women’s health in Egypt.
Karen Lumley (Redditch) (Con)
6. What support the Arab Partnership Participation Fund has provided to projects on political reform and free and fair elections in the Occupied Palestinian Territories.
The Secretary of State for International Development (Mr Andrew Mitchell)
The Arab Partnership Participation Fund has supported political participation in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. It has funded a variety of civil society projects.
Karen Lumley
Democracy is something that we in this country take for granted. Will the Minister assure me that, as part of our future campaign, we will promote democracy and the rule of law in the occupied territories?
Mr Mitchell
My hon. Friend puts her finger on a key ingredient of development. Promoting democracy and the rule of law in the Occupied Palestinian Territories is central to our engagement in the region, as I described in answer to an earlier question.
Mark Durkan (Foyle) (SDLP)
Does the Secretary of State’s hope for free and fair elections to the Palestinian Authority extend to Palestinians in East Jerusalem?
Mr Mitchell
The British Government’s position is clear and unequivocal on this, as the Foreign Secretary has assured the House on many occasions. Our commitment to promoting the two-state solution and to promoting democracy in this troubled area is absolute.
Ian Lucas (Wrexham) (Lab)
T1. If he will make a statement on his departmental responsibilities.
The Secretary of State for International Development (Mr Andrew Mitchell)
My Department is very focused on delivering the results of the family planning summit that will take place in London on 11 July, chaired by our Prime Minister and Melinda Gates. We have been very focused on the food agenda at the G8 Development Ministers meeting last week, and I will shortly be visiting Malawi.
Ian Lucas
Two weeks ago, I visited a charitably funded Bedouin school in the west bank that was threatened with demolition by the Israeli Government. This is not the way to make progress, so will the Secretary of State make urgent representations to the Israeli Government to prevent the demolition of places of learning?
Mr Mitchell
The hon. Gentleman rightly says that almost all these demolitions are illegal, and that is a point that the Foreign Secretary has made regularly in his meetings with the Israeli Government.
Gavin Barwell (Croydon Central) (Con)
T6. I congratulate my right hon. Friend on ensuring that the taxpayer benefits from the sale of our remaining stake in Actis. Is that not in sharp contrast with the shameful way in which the previous Government allowed Actis to be spun out of CDC in such a way that the British taxpayer did not receive a single penny?
Mr Mitchell
I am afraid that my hon. Friend is entirely correct; the shameful way in which the previous Government sought to privatise Actis has meant that the taxpayer has received nothing at all from this management company. Thanks to the changes that the coalition Government have made, it is estimated that the taxpayer will receive between $100 million and $200 million.
Rushanara Ali (Bethnal Green and Bow) (Lab)
The forthcoming Rio+20 conference is an important opportunity for this Government to show international leadership on climate change, green jobs and sustainable development. Will the Secretary of State tell the House how many meetings have taken place between his Department and other relevant Departments to ensure a joined-up British approach to the Rio conference? Will he write to me with more details?
Mr Mitchell
I can tell the hon. Lady that meetings are taking place every week and every day, most recently yesterday. The delegation will be led by my right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister, and I have discussed this with him within the past 24 hours.
Bob Blackman (Harrow East) (Con)
T7. I warmly welcome the dramatic increase in aid to our Commonwealth partners, including the funding for the Queen Elizabeth Diamond Jubilee Trust. Will my right hon. Friend inform the House of the type of projects we are funding that are much-needed by our Commonwealth allies?
Mr Mitchell
The whole House will be grateful to Sir John Major for chairing the Queen Elizabeth Diamond Jubilee Trust. The British Government have put in £50 million to the match fund for these projects. Under the previous Government, support for the Commonwealth declined from some 45% of our development budget to 35%, whereas under this Government, over five years, it will increase to 55%.
Fabian Hamilton (Leeds North East) (Lab)
T2. The situation in Syria continues to take lives, as well as to produce instability in the region. Will the Secretary of State update the House on what action the British Government are taking to help with the humanitarian crisis in that country?
Mr Mitchell
The hon. Gentleman will have heard what the Foreign Secretary has been doing at the United Nations. On humanitarian support, I can tell the hon. Gentleman that we are supporting the United Nations, its Office for the Co-ordination of Humanitarian Affairs and a number of international non-governmental organisations on dealing with the consequences both outside Syria—on the borders and in the surrounding countries—and internally, within that country.
Amber Rudd (Hastings and Rye) (Con)
T8. In the context of the NATO summit and the planned withdrawal from Afghanistan, what assessment has the Secretary of State made of the provision for women’s rights after our departure?
Mr Mitchell
My hon. Friend is entirely right to focus on the role of women in Afghanistan. On my recent visit to Afghanistan, I launched a new civil society fund that will directly address her point. Additionally, the fact that the international community has helped to secure places for 6 million children in school in Afghanistan in recent years will have a transformational effect on the role of women in Afghanistan.
Graham Jones (Hyndburn) (Lab)
T3. South Sudan is slipping towards war. Recently leaked documents from the World Bank have highlighted the fact that the south could be completely bankrupt by July as a result of the oil dispute. With countries such as China moving to fill the democratic gap, there should be concern that good democratic governance could slip off the agenda in South Sudan. What is his Department doing to ensure that that does not happen?
Mr Mitchell
Ministers in my Department have had robust meetings with the Government of South Sudan and that of Sudan. The message we give is that it is important that oil should be brought back into commission and exported from Sudan and it is very important that the African Union road map should be adhered to by both sides.
Sale of Actis
Andrew Mitchell Excerpts(13 years, 9 months ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for International Development (Mr Andrew Mitchell)
I wish to inform the House of the Government’s decision to sell its residual 40% ownership interest in Actis Capital LLP (Actis).
Actis is a fund management business which promotes and manages private equity funds on behalf of third-party investors in a range of developing countries.
Actis was created in 2004 as a spin-out from CDC Group plc (CDC), the UK’s development finance institution, following a reorganisation in which CDC moved from being a direct investor to being an intermediated investor. CDC sold a 60% stake in Actis to Actis management for £373,000. I would refer the House to the written statements of 8 January and 8 July 2004 by the then Secretary of State for International Development on the reorganisation of CDC.
DFID does not take part in the day-to-day operations of Actis, has no board representation and very limited governance rights.
Since 2004 Actis has performed well. It is now established as a leading and successful fund manager in its own right, with some US$4.6 billion of funds under management. Yet despite the successful performance of funds managed by Actis, as a consequence of the ownership structure and financial arrangements put in place in 2004 under the previous Government, DFID has not received any payment whatsoever or direct financial benefit from Actis.
In my evidence to the International Development Committee of this House in January 2011 and in the context of that Committee’s report on the future of CDC, I said that I thought that the arrangement entered into in 2004 by the then Government represented poor value for the taxpayer, that there was no reason for the Government to retain their shareholding in Actis and that moreover, if we can realise proper value for it, in the interests of the taxpayer, then we should do so. The International Development Committee took a similar view as it subsequently recommended in its report that DFID’s shareholding in Actis should be sold, but that care must be taken to achieve maximum value.
DFID’s financial adviser on the sale process—Canaccord Genuity Hawkpoint Limited (Hawkpoint)—has looked closely at the Government’s position and rights within Actis and at Actis’s future prospects. Hawkpoint has advised that, even if Actis continues to be successful, the Government have no realistic prospect of receiving direct profit distributions in the foreseeable future. Hawkpoint estimates the current value of the Government’s 40% ownership stake in Actis at US$ nil to US$3 million. The Government followed an open and competitive sale process. Our advisers identified and approached a number of potential bidders who were believed to have the strategic rationale and the financial capacity to acquire the DFID stake. DFID also advertised publicly in the Financial Times (Worldwide) that the DFID stake was for sale. Following Hawkpoint’s discussions with potential bidders, no third-party bidders subsequently came forwards with a credible offer for the DFID stake as currently constituted. The Government therefore decided to proceed on the basis of the offer made by Actis management.
The Government have now concluded their negotiations with the management team. In consideration of the sale of its stake in Actis, DFID will receive both an upfront cash payment and a share in the future profitability of Actis’s funds. The cash element will comprise US$13 million payable in two equal instalments, the first instalment payable on completion and the second instalment 12 months after completion. The profit share element will comprise a 10% share of carried interest profit of Actis Emerging Markets Fund 3 and Actis Infrastructure Fund 2, which have to date invested in 34 businesses across the developing world, and a 7.5% share of carried interest profit in Actis’ latest Fund 4, which is currently being raised.
The carried interest consideration will be payable over time and its value will depend on the size and future performance of Actis’s funds. However, if Actis’s funds continue to perform strongly, as they have done historically, then this profit share would generate a substantial return for the Government and for the British taxpayer, which mid-point calculations developed by our financial advisers indicate could over time deliver an amount in excess of US$100 million (undiscounted). In the event of a subsequent transaction taking place within the next five years which attributes a significantly higher value to Actis, provisions have been agreed enabling the Government to share in the proceeds of that transaction.
The Actis business has been created through combined contributions from CDC and the Actis partners. CDC contributed the initial investment portfolio to be managed, the people and their associated infrastructure and knowledge base. Beyond that initial contribution, CDC has continued to support the viability and economics of Actis through its formative years via its commitment to invest in further substantial funds raised and managed by Actis.
On the back of that support, Actis has built a successful business measured in terms both of investment performance and third-party funds raised. Under previous arrangements, the UK taxpayer was not able to benefit directly from the success of the Actis business. By giving the Government the chance to share in the future profits of funds managed by this successful business, I believe that this sale represents a much fairer and better deal for the taxpayer.
The US$13 million cash element of the consideration is alone significantly above Hawkpoint’s estimate of the value of DFID’s existing stake at between US$ nil and US $3 million, with significant scope for upside beyond this through Government’s share in carried interest.
I am today publishing Hawkpoint’s fairness opinion to Government and other information about the sale on the DFID website and will also place copies in the Library of the House.
Oral Answers to Questions
Andrew Mitchell Excerpts(13 years, 10 months ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Martin Horwood (Cheltenham) (LD)
1. What support his Department is providing to assist with the humanitarian situation in Syria.
The Secretary of State for International Development (Mr Andrew Mitchell)
We have given direct support to 20,000 families for food rations, medical supplies and emergency water. We are today announcing additional support for humanitarian aid.
Martin Horwood
The massacres unfolding at the hands of the murderous Assad regime are now being compared to great humanitarian tragedies such as Srebrenica. Unhindered humanitarian access is desperately needed. Has the recent Valerie Amos mission on behalf of the United Nations offered any hope whatever?
Mr Mitchell
Any hope from that mission is severely limited. At the weekend I spoke to Baroness Amos, the head of the United Nations Office for the Co-ordination of Humanitarian Affairs, and on Monday night I spoke to Jakob Kellenberger, the head of the International Committee of the Red Cross. We continue to reflect the horror and indignation at what is happening in Syria—as my hon. Friend expressed—and to demand unfettered access for all humanitarian agencies.
Mr Wayne David (Caerphilly) (Lab)
13. Will the Government give a commitment that maximum pressure will be put on Russia in particular to ensure that it plays a far more positive role in future?
Mr Mitchell
The hon. Gentleman is entirely right to identify Russia as the key blocker to international agreement and to taking effective action on humanitarian relief, and more widely, in Syria. This subject is very dear to the heart of the Foreign Secretary, and he has repeatedly raised it in New York.
Rushanara Ali (Bethnal Green and Bow) (Lab)
I welcome the Government’s efforts to secure humanitarian access to help the people of Syria, but what steps are being taken to protect the estimated 230,000 internal and external refugees fleeing the violence, especially in light of reports that the Syrian regime is laying mines along the routes to the borders with Lebanon and Turkey?
Mr Mitchell
The hon. Lady rightly flags up the plight of those who have been forced to leave their homes, and not only the refugees who have fled across the border, but the internally displaced people. That is why some of our specific support goes to help 5,500 people who are in Syria and who have been forced to leave their homes.
Andrew Percy (Brigg and Goole) (Con)
2. What funding his Department has allocated to the Palestinian territories in 2011-12.
The Secretary of State for International Development (Mr Andrew Mitchell)
The UK has allocated funding for Palestinian development to help build a future Palestinian state that is stable, prosperous and an effective partner for peace.
Andrew Percy
I am sure the Secretary of State agrees that it is imperative that any funds provided by this country to the Palestinian Authority go towards securing the Quartet principles. Does he therefore share my concern that there are still Palestinian textbooks that contain anti-Christian, anti-western and anti-Israeli sentiments? Can he assure me that his Department is doing everything possible to ensure that no British taxpayer money is being used to fund textbooks of that sort?
Mr Mitchell
I have looked very carefully into this issue, not least because I know of my hon. Friend’s interest in it, and I have found no evidence in Palestinian school textbooks of what he describes. I was in Gaza just before Christmas, and I raised the specific matter then. I am sure my hon. Friend will share my pleasure in the fact that the State Department in America has set up an inquiry to examine the quality of both Israeli and Palestinian textbooks and will be reporting later this year, probably in the autumn. He and I will, no doubt, look with great interest at what the report has to say.
Richard Burden (Birmingham, Northfield) (Lab)
I was in Gaza at the weekend, as it witnessed the biggest escalation in Israeli air strikes and Palestinian rockets for three years. Although we all hope that the current truce holds, does the Secretary of State agree that the ongoing and daily madness of Israel’s blockade is illustrated by the fact that it incentivises a few to make millions from a tunnel economy and benefits armed groups, while legitimate Palestinian businesses cannot export, the UN cannot get the materials it needs to rebuild shattered schools and hospitals, and the poor are forced to rely on food handouts?
Mr Mitchell
The hon. Gentleman makes a reasonable point about the effects of this action in terms of the Palestinian economy, but he will know that the Government’s position is clear: we urge both sides to desist from the actions he has described.
Robert Halfon (Harlow) (Con)
Given that many hundreds of missiles have been fired from Gaza into Israel—some armed with ball-bearings and causing enormous hardship to many—will my right hon. Friend use the levers of aid to put pressure on the Gaza authorities and Hamas to stop firing them?
Mr Mitchell
I had an opportunity on a recent trip to Israel to visit Sderot and see for myself the effects of what my hon. Friend is describing. British development policy on Palestine is very clear: we concentrate on state building and strengthening financial management by public authorities; we support the private sector on growth, reducing unemployment and eliminating poverty; and we are working closely with the United Nations Relief and Works Agency and the World Food Programme on issues of humanitarian relief. I will, however, take on board the point he is making.
Dame Joan Ruddock (Lewisham, Deptford) (Lab)
The last time I was in Gaza the thing I thought was most cruel was the denial to the Palestinians of their land—35% of their land—and of 85% of their fishing rights. Does the Secretary of State agree that it would be so much better if people could produce food for themselves and for the local economy, and were not reliant on food aid?
Mr Mitchell
The right hon. Lady is entirely right to say that it is much better to produce food in a sustainable way than to have to rely on food aid, and that is one of the policies we are pursing vigorously around the world. However, as she will know, the answer is for both parties in this long, protracted and bitter dispute to negotiate with each other in good faith. That is the way in which we will reach a two-state solution.
Ann McKechin (Glasgow North) (Lab)
3. What steps his Department is taking to address governance issues in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.[Official Report, 26 March 2012, Vol. 542, c. 4MC.]
Harriett Baldwin (West Worcestershire) (Con)
5. What recent assessment he has made of the development situation in Ethiopia.
The Secretary of State for International Development (Mr Andrew Mitchell)
Ethiopia is making real progress in development and Britain’s programme plays a crucial role, as I saw for myself on the ground during January.
Harriett Baldwin
As my entry in the register shows, I travelled with Save the Children to Ethiopia during the February recess and I saw at first hand how UK aid is saving children’s lives in remote parts of the country. Will my right hon. Friend update the House on how UK aid is helping with malnutrition in Ethiopia and other parts of the world?
Mr Mitchell
I thank my hon. Friend for making that visit with Save the Children. I know she has both great interest and great expertise in that area. She asks about the results, and last year Britain secured provision so that some 1.7 million children are getting into school. We have also conducted a very successful pilot programme to help eradicate early marriage. Over the next four years, Britain will help to ensure that some 2 million children are able to go to school in Ethiopia.
Fiona Bruce (Congleton) (Con)
6. What steps his Department is taking to tackle malaria in developing countries.
Sheila Gilmore (Edinburgh East) (Lab)
7. What recent progress he has made in bringing forward legislative proposals to set official development assistance at 0.7% of gross national product.
The Secretary of State for International Development (Mr Andrew Mitchell)
The coalition Government have set out how we will stand by the United Kingdom’s promise to invest 0.7% of national income as aid from 2013. The Bill is ready and we will legislate when parliamentary time allows.
Sheila Gilmore
May I therefore take from that answer that the Bill will be in the forthcoming Queen’s Speech?
Mr Mitchell
It would be quite wrong of me to anticipate the contents of the Gracious Speech, but as I have explained, the Bill is ready to go and will proceed when parliamentary time permits.
Mr Peter Bone (Wellingborough) (Con)
Does the very able Secretary of State—[Laughter]—no, genuinely, the very able Secretary of State. Does he understand the concern in the country that the overseas aid budget is to increase from £8 billion to £12 billion because of this commitment while brave men and women in our armed forces are being sacked because of the cuts?
Mr Mitchell
As I have said to my hon. Friend before, I yield to no one in my respect for the armed forces having served in the Army myself. However, Britain’s development budget is spent very much in Britain’s national interests. We do it because it is the right thing to do and because it is hugely in our national interests. There is enormous support across the country, which is not always reflected in all our tabloids, for Britain’s very strong commitment to this important policy area.
Mr Ivan Lewis (Bury South) (Lab)
The Secretary of State has been unable to give hon. Members a cast-iron guarantee today that the 0.7% legislation promised by the coalition parties will be in the Queen’s Speech. Can he now assure the House that he has made it clear to the Chancellor that any retreat in the Budget on the Government’s commitment to spend 0.7% on aid by 2013 would be a broken promise? It would be another nail in the coffin of the Prime Minister’s claim to have changed the Conservative party.
Mr Mitchell
The hon. Gentleman has set up a straw man that he knows to be untrue. We are the first Government in history who have set out very clearly precisely how we will reach the 0.7% target. As I have made very clear, the Bill inevitably has to take its place in the queue behind essential legislation for rescuing the country from the perilous economic condition inherited from the Government of whom he was a part.
Ian Lavery (Wansbeck) (Lab)
8. What his policy is on the production of biofuels in developing countries.
Mr Edward Leigh (Gainsborough) (Con)
9. What recent assessment he has made of the humanitarian situation in Somalia.
The Secretary of State for International Development (Mr Andrew Mitchell)
Thanks to British aid and support, the lives of hundreds of thousands of Somalis have been saved, but insecurity and drought continue to threaten lives, as I saw during my visits in recent months to Puntland, Mogadishu and Dolow, and to Hargeisa in Somaliland.
Mr Mitchell
My hon. Friend is entirely right to identify the conference on Somalia organised by the Prime Minister as the beginning and not the end of the process. Certainly, there will be an absolute commitment across Whitehall to drive forward the results of that conference and make them meaningful on the ground in the way that my hon. Friend describes.
Graham Jones (Hyndburn) (Lab)
T1. If he will make a statement on his departmental responsibilities.
The Secretary of State for International Development (Mr Andrew Mitchell)
My Department is heavily engaged in achieving the development results set out to Parliament a year ago in the bilateral and multilateral aid reviews. Those include securing education for at least 11 million children, saving the lives of 50,000 women in childbirth, and getting clean water and sanitation to more people than live in the whole of the United Kingdom. Britain is also heavily engaged in difficult humanitarian situations around the world, including in Syria.
Graham Jones
On 24 February, Israeli authorities approved 500 new homes in the west bank settlement of Shiloh and retroactively legalised more than 200 built-without-permits, some in the settler outpost of Shvut Rachel. What does the Minister say to his colleagues in Israel to try to stop these illegal developments?
Mr Mitchell
As the hon. Gentleman makes clear, these settlements are illegal and the Foreign Secretary has made that absolutely clear to his opposite numbers, as did I when I visited Israel, the west bank and Gaza just before Christmas. [Interruption.]
Mr Speaker
Order. May we have some order in the Chamber? There are far too many noisy private conversations when we are discussing the plight of the poorest people on the face of the planet.
Gordon Henderson (Sittingbourne and Sheppey) (Con)
T2. What is my right hon. Friend doing to ensure that British funds provided to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency are not abused in a way that undermines the middle east peace process?
Mr Andrew Mitchell
I can tell my hon. Friend that I have looked in detail at that, not least because of the point that my hon. Friend the Member for Harlow (Robert Halfon) made earlier, and not least because during the latter part of last year I spent time with UNRWA in Gaza. We are very clear that the funds that we are allocating to UNWRA are buying the results that we have agreed they should buy.
Tony Cunningham (Workington) (Lab)
Last week the target was met on access to safe water, yet diarrhoea continues to be the biggest killer of children in Africa and the second biggest killer in south Asia. What priority is the Department giving to sanitation?
Mr Mitchell
The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right to flag up the importance of clean water and sanitation. That is why in the bilateral and multilateral reviews last year we set out clearly that this Government would seek to ensure over the next four years that we get clean water and sanitation to more people than live in the whole of the United Kingdom.
Mr Edward Leigh (Gainsborough) (Con)
T3. The people of Somaliland have deep wells of friendship towards this country and they have made a success of their country, unlike Somalia as a whole. Is it not about time that we recognised their independence?
Mr Mitchell
The Foreign Secretary has set out clearly the need to resolve some disputes which affect the land space of Puntland and Somaliland, but that the issue of the future of Somaliland is a matter for Somaliland, Somalia and the surrounding countries. [Interruption.]
Mr Speaker
Order. May we have a bit of order so that the House can hear Mr Graham Allen?
Mr Graham Allen (Nottingham North) (Lab)
T5. Will the Secretary of State commit not only to work on further food and shelter developments for the people who need them throughout the globe, but to look at the social and emotional development of the children and families of those suffering areas, and to learn from some of the early intervention techniques being pioneered in this country?
Mr Andrew Mitchell
I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for giving me notice of this question. I have considered it in some detail. I agree with him about the importance of early intervention. Much of the Department’s work in relation to the early years is to try to make sure that contraception is available to women so that they can space their children and decide whether or not they want children; to focus particularly on nutrition, the lack of which causes stunting; and to get children, particularly girls, into school. I believe that those three things at least contribute to the agenda that the hon. Gentleman so wisely champions.
Andrew Stephenson (Pendle) (Con)
T4. As many residents of Pendle have friends or family in Kashmir, will my right hon. Friend update the House on the progress of reconstruction work and aid following the 2005 earthquake?
Mr Mitchell
My hon. Friend is right to point to the important work that is going on in Kashmir, not least following the earthquake. I can tell him that work has recently been completed. We have refurbished some 37 schools, affecting 10,000 children, and we have also managed to rebuild 35 bridges and secure about 66,000 latrines.
Graeme Morrice (Livingston) (Lab)
T8. Next Thursday is world water day, when we recognise that 743 million people worldwide do not have access to safe water, and more than 2.6 billion live without proper sanitation. Although I welcome the announcement last week that we have met one of the access to water millennium development goals targets, can the Secretary of State tell the House what ministerial representation the Government will have at the high-level meeting of Sanitation and Water for All on 20 April?
Mr Mitchell
The hon. Gentleman is entirely right to emphasise the importance of this. I referred earlier to the Government’s commitment on water and sanitation, and it is because of the importance of the agenda he has identified that I will be attending the conference myself.
Tony Baldry (Banbury) (Con)
Will my right hon. Friend confirm that the whole of the DFID budget is effectively allocated and that, if non-governmental organisations or others exhort him to spend more money on one aspect of international development, however worthwhile, it behoves them to explain where in the departmental budget other savings need to be made?
Mr Mitchell
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. The whole of the international development budget now focuses on outputs and outcomes, buying results, with the added extra that we now have an independent watchdog that can assure taxpayers that the money is really well spent.
Sir Gerald Kaufman (Manchester, Gorton) (Lab)
In thanking the right hon. Gentleman for the way he dedicates himself to alleviating the suffering of the Palestinian people and congratulating him on the trouble he takes to go there and see for himself, may I ask him, with regard to textbooks for Palestinian children and children in Gaza, whether it would be valuable if there were schools in which they could study, in view of the large number of schools destroyed by the Israelis and their refusal to allow building materials in to rebuild them?
Mr Mitchell
The right hon. Gentleman, who has long and distinguished experience in championing this area, is entirely right. We will be meeting UNRWA on Monday, but I have seen for myself the effective way it is working to alleviate suffering and promote education in Gaza and elsewhere.
Supplementary Estimates 2011-12
Andrew Mitchell Excerpts(13 years, 11 months ago)
Written StatementsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Secretary of State for International Development (Mr Andrew Mitchell)
Subject to parliamentary approval of the necessary supplementary estimate, the Department for International Development’s departmental expenditure limit (DEL) will be reduced by £13.0 million from £7,880.3 million to £7,867.3 million.
Within the DEL change, the impact on resources and capital are as set out in the following table:
Voted | Non-voted | Voted | Non-voted | Total | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Resource DEL | -309.0 | 31.9 | 5,341.3 | 867.9 | 6,209.2 |
Of which: | |||||
Administration budget | -11.6 | 0 | 111.2 | 0 | 111.2 |
Depreciation budget | 21.0 | 21.0 | |||
Capital DEL | 264.1 | 0 | 1,658.1 | 0 | 1,658.1 |
Total DEL | -44.9 | 31.9 | 6,999.4 | 867.9 | 7,867.3 |
The change in the Resource element of DEL arises from:
Voted
Transfers out to other Government Departments, including those relating to the jointly managed conflict pool. This sits on Department for International Development’s baseline but is shared between Department for International Development, Foreign and Commonwealth Office and Ministry of Defence. Budget transfers relate to expenditure managed by these other Government Departments.
£4.5 million transferred to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office in respect of the tri-departmental conflict pool. This was funded from the original conflict pool allocation of £256.0 million, and £4.0 million was funded from DFID RDEL (given unforeseen pressures in Libya);
£4.0 million transferred to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office in respect of the tri-departmental conflict pool. This was in addition to the £4.5 million outlined above and was a result of unforeseen pressures in Libya;
£2.1 million transferred to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office in respect of approved funding to the returns and re-integration fund;
£2.6 million transferred to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) in respect of approved funding for DARWIN project;
£1.9 million transferred to the Home Office in respect of approved contribution to ODA-eligible UK Border Agency (UKBA) funding;
£0.9 million transferred to DEFRA in respect of the technical contribution fund for the International Atomic Energy Agency;
£10.0 million transferred to DEFRA in respect of DFID in respect of the overall ODA and International Climate Finance management strategy. An ODA/GNI target of 0.56% was set out in DFID’s CSR10 settlement letter, as was a climate change spending target of £275.0 million;
£7.1 million transferred to Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) in respect of the overall ODA and International Climate Finance management strategy;
£3.0 million transferred from the Department for Education to DFID in respect of a forecast underspend on ODA eligible budget.;
£247.0 million transferred internally from DFID’s RDEL budget to DFID’s CDEL budget in order to facilitate the deposit of the IDA 16 £300.0 million promissory note. This represented the first deposit towards the 16th replenishment of the International Development Association, the arm of the World Bank whose funding provides people with education, health care, clean water and access to economic opportunities in around 80 of the world’s poorest countries. The UK has pledged £2.664 billion to cover the period from July 2011 to June 2014.
Voted Summary | |
|---|---|
Net RDEL transfer to OGDs | -£30.1 m |
Transfer to non-voted RDEL to support EC attribution | -£31.9 m |
Transfer to DFID CDEL from DFID RDEL | -£247.0 m |
Subtotal voted | -£309.0 m |
Non-voted
Adjustment to the total of EC attribution
Based on updated information of 2009 outturn made by EU directly on behalf of the UK the figure for the outturn of the 2009 EC attribution was £31.9 million higher than outlined in the 2011 main estimate. As such, an adjustment is required to reflect the new estimated amount for the non-voted EC attribution total.
£31.9 million transferred from DFID in respect of a forecast underspend on ODA eligible budget.
Non-voted summary | |
|---|---|
Increase in EC attributed aid | £31.9 m |
Subtotal non-voted | £31.9 m |
Total reductions in RDEL | £277.1 m |
The change in the capital element of DEL arises from:
Voted
Internal transfers from DFID RDEL to DFID CDEL, and transfers of CDEL from OGDs as part of previously stated RDEL to CDEL swaps.
£10.0 million CDEL received from DEFRA in respect of the overall ODA and International Climate Finance management strategy;
£7.1 million CDEL received from DECC in respect of the overall ODA and International Climate Finance management strategy;
£247.0 million internal transfer from DFID RDEL to DFID CDEL. The majority of this internal swap is used to partly fund the £300.0 million promissory note to IDA 16, summarised earlier. DFID’s contribution to IDA, like many other donors, is made by way of promissory note to enable the organisation to enter into commitments with the support of the promissory note but ensure effective cash management and avoid large unutilised cash balances.
Voted Summary | |
|---|---|
Transfer to DFID CDEL from DFID RDEL | £247.0 m |
Transfer from OGDs to DFID CDEL | £17.1 m |
Subtotal voted | £264.1 m |
Non-voted
No CDEL non voted adjustments
Non-voted Summary | |
|---|---|
Subtotal non voted | £0 |
Total increases in CDEL | £264.1 m |
DFID’s Annually Managed Expenditure (AME) budget is used to fund amendments to provision requirements and also fair value adjustments to financial instruments, notably DFID’s existing loan portfolio. DFID’s significant provisions include contributions towards the International Finance Facility for Immunisations (IFFIm) and Advance Market Commitments (AMC).
Voted
Adjustments have been made to reflect updated expectations of provision requirements and utilisation of provisions based on revised information. The most notable of these are in IFFIm and AMC provisions. DFID’s provision requirements for IFFIm represent the net present value of committed payments to cover the UK share of currently issued bonds. This year bond issues are expected to be lower than originally forecast, due to lower anticipated demand for bonds as a result of the global economic circumstances. AMC’s provision represents committed payments to fund supplier agreements signed to produce vaccines to meet demand. The value of agreements signed in the year is now lower than forecast at main estimate stage and a reduction in AME is expected for this reason.
These reductions are offset by an expected increase in AME to cover fair value adjustments in loans, which are now treated as AME by way of the Clear Line of Sight reform. The majority of DFID’s loan debtor represents DFID’s share of a euro-denominated portfolio of loans given to developing countries which is administered by the European Investment Bank (EIB). It is expected the valuation of this outstanding balance will reduce due to a combination of exchange rate movements, recognising the weakening of the euro against sterling, but also to reflect doubts over the recoverability of certain balances where the countries are in default or are expected to be given debt relief status.
Expected net income from the sale of assets disposed of in the financial year is £1.6 million, and is capital AME. This is included below.
AME voted summary | |
|---|---|
Increase in utilisation of provisions | -£10.9 m |
Increase in provision | £3.4 m |
Income in AME Capital | -£1.6 m |
Subtotal voted | £9.1 m |
No AME non-voted adjustments have been made
AME non-voted summary | |
|---|---|
Sub total non-voted | £0 |
Total decrease AME | £9.1m |