This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/may/01/development-aid-ideas

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Development: aid, trade and ideas Development: aid, trade and ideas
(5 months later)
Charity begins at home. A solid conservative sentiment, though not one for a Conservative-led government that is punitive towards Britain's poor, while sticking with a brave march towards a UN target to find 0.7% GNP for overseas aid. David Cameron responded in kind to Gordon Brown's bipartisan tone, and made the target a point of pride. Along with gay marriage, it is a rare remnant of his early promise of Tory modernisation. And the big picture remains heartening: amid hard times, the UK is sticking with its pledge to the world's poor, and incidentally earning a hearing in all sorts of discussions from Brasília to Beijing.Charity begins at home. A solid conservative sentiment, though not one for a Conservative-led government that is punitive towards Britain's poor, while sticking with a brave march towards a UN target to find 0.7% GNP for overseas aid. David Cameron responded in kind to Gordon Brown's bipartisan tone, and made the target a point of pride. Along with gay marriage, it is a rare remnant of his early promise of Tory modernisation. And the big picture remains heartening: amid hard times, the UK is sticking with its pledge to the world's poor, and incidentally earning a hearing in all sorts of discussions from Brasília to Beijing.
Zoom down from the global perspective to the low politics of Tory party management and things look messier. Both the activists and the papers they read have always harboured grave doubts about aid. Mr Cameron once shrugged them off, but as his ratings dived he floated the possibility of letting the armed forces loose on the aid budget. To the delight of the right, and the horror of the charities, this sounded as if it could be the death knell for the pledge, until No 10 revealed that it was sticking with a strict OECD definition of "aid", which greatly limited the effect. Then yesterday, hours before the Ukip challenge in today's shire ballots, the whirr of spin was heard again, as it emerged that South Africa's aid was being cut. The funds involved are modest and will be reallocated elsewhere, but the fury in Pretoria at a "unilateral" move out of the blue suggests London was more interested in picking a fight for publicity than the diplomatic clout that generous aid ought to afford.Zoom down from the global perspective to the low politics of Tory party management and things look messier. Both the activists and the papers they read have always harboured grave doubts about aid. Mr Cameron once shrugged them off, but as his ratings dived he floated the possibility of letting the armed forces loose on the aid budget. To the delight of the right, and the horror of the charities, this sounded as if it could be the death knell for the pledge, until No 10 revealed that it was sticking with a strict OECD definition of "aid", which greatly limited the effect. Then yesterday, hours before the Ukip challenge in today's shire ballots, the whirr of spin was heard again, as it emerged that South Africa's aid was being cut. The funds involved are modest and will be reallocated elsewhere, but the fury in Pretoria at a "unilateral" move out of the blue suggests London was more interested in picking a fight for publicity than the diplomatic clout that generous aid ought to afford.
All this leaves Mr Cameron in an odd position for this June's G8. The first to take place in the UK since Gleneagles, this meeting inevitably stands in the shadow of Tony Blair's achievements in 2005. Having ringfenced aid, the PM can still claim to be among the west's most committed leaders. But the mixed signals his government is now sending make for a less than flattering contrast with the Labour years, which saw DfID established as an impressive independent department; the breaking of the bad old tie between aid and arms and other export sales; and an unfulfilled push on trade justice, alongside the big strides on poverty and debt relief. Lots of other things should have been on this list (tax justice and corporate abuse, for instance), but it is pretty impressive nonetheless. Come 2015, Mr Cameron will not be able to claim so many clear victories.All this leaves Mr Cameron in an odd position for this June's G8. The first to take place in the UK since Gleneagles, this meeting inevitably stands in the shadow of Tony Blair's achievements in 2005. Having ringfenced aid, the PM can still claim to be among the west's most committed leaders. But the mixed signals his government is now sending make for a less than flattering contrast with the Labour years, which saw DfID established as an impressive independent department; the breaking of the bad old tie between aid and arms and other export sales; and an unfulfilled push on trade justice, alongside the big strides on poverty and debt relief. Lots of other things should have been on this list (tax justice and corporate abuse, for instance), but it is pretty impressive nonetheless. Come 2015, Mr Cameron will not be able to claim so many clear victories.
Much of this is not his fault, but in the context of his rash, historic promises on cuts overall, the chances of sustaining the aid ringfence past 2015 do not look great. Furthermore, while this government's concern to justify by demonstrating results is entirely proper, under Andrew Mitchell it sometimes veered into a drive for development hits – big wins achieved quickly. Yet progress in impoverished, insecure regions can be uneven and frustratingly slow, taking not years, but decades. Then there is also the fact that development has come a long way since the can-do optimism of the noughties. Many of the world's new middle-income countries have come up rapidly but very unequally, raising the tricky question of how to assist the millions who subsist in grinding poverty within apparently booming economies. A related issue is getting cash into the hands of the deserving poor and out of the hands of inefficient or corrupt bureaucrats, which has encouraged trials with direct cash transfers. Development thinking has also advanced, with the experiments of Esther Duflo and Abhijit Banerjee emphasising the importance of using the money to create the right incentives.Much of this is not his fault, but in the context of his rash, historic promises on cuts overall, the chances of sustaining the aid ringfence past 2015 do not look great. Furthermore, while this government's concern to justify by demonstrating results is entirely proper, under Andrew Mitchell it sometimes veered into a drive for development hits – big wins achieved quickly. Yet progress in impoverished, insecure regions can be uneven and frustratingly slow, taking not years, but decades. Then there is also the fact that development has come a long way since the can-do optimism of the noughties. Many of the world's new middle-income countries have come up rapidly but very unequally, raising the tricky question of how to assist the millions who subsist in grinding poverty within apparently booming economies. A related issue is getting cash into the hands of the deserving poor and out of the hands of inefficient or corrupt bureaucrats, which has encouraged trials with direct cash transfers. Development thinking has also advanced, with the experiments of Esther Duflo and Abhijit Banerjee emphasising the importance of using the money to create the right incentives.
Finally, there is trade: for much of the 1990s, development orthodoxy had it that simply removing barriers to it was enough to allow poor countries to get rich. Last week's tragedy in a clothing factory in Dhaka was a painful reminder of just how misjudged some of that marketopia was. Aid is not only about cash, it is about ideas, and Mr Cameron and the rest of the leaders of the rich world still have a great deal of thinking to do.Finally, there is trade: for much of the 1990s, development orthodoxy had it that simply removing barriers to it was enough to allow poor countries to get rich. Last week's tragedy in a clothing factory in Dhaka was a painful reminder of just how misjudged some of that marketopia was. Aid is not only about cash, it is about ideas, and Mr Cameron and the rest of the leaders of the rich world still have a great deal of thinking to do.
Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning.