G8 leaders retreat from Africa aid pledge

from the Scotsman

By ROSS LYDALL
WHEN the leaders of the world's richest nations gathered at Gleneagles in 2005, they solemnly pledged to double aid to Africa by 2010 and tackle climate change.
Three years on, their mighty ambition and high rhetoric have been replaced by a series of broken promises.

Today, as the G8 leaders prepare to issue another communiqué on Africa, the expectation is that the landmark agreements made at the 2005 summit will be watered down. With most G8 countries facing pressures over an economic slowdown in their domestic markets, there is a temptation to divert budget resources away from issues that do not generally excite voters. Overseas aid is top of the list.

Only the UK and Japan have come close to maintaining the kind of aid budgets required to meet the Gleneagles targets.

Bob Geldof has described the G8 as a "contemptuous joke", after it was revealed to be only 14 per cent of the way towards hitting its target of providing an extra £12.5 billion in aid by 2010.

Yesterday, that kind of criticism came from within the luxury setting of the G8's gathering in Hokkaido.

Robert Zoellick, the head of the World Bank, warned that 100 million people could be pushed back into poverty unless the promised funds kept coming.

Ban Ki-moon, the secretary-general of the United Nations, made it clear the problems caused by the failure to increase aid had been compounded by the lack of action on global warming.

This meant droughts and floods had increased at a time when Africans were dying from a lack of food, medical care and the ability to help themselves out of poverty by trading with the rest of the world.

Mr Ban urged the G8 to send a strong political signal by setting a long-term goal of halving greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.

He said: "We tend to think of climate change as something in the future. It is not. We see now, most of all in Africa, that drought and changing weather patterns are compounding the challenges we face in attaining the MDGs (millennium development goals]."

About the time of the Gleneagles gathering, Live Aid became Live8 and Geldof led marches in London and Scotland to "Make Poverty History".

The summit was quickly forgotten after it ended suddenly, following the terrorist attacks on London.

Third World debt was written off – although campaigners felt wealthy countries were hiding behind this, rather than committing themselves to spending new money on aid that could boost agriculture and educate children, as well as providing clean running water, sanitation and mosquito nets to help to eradicate malaria.

Then came the hard financial reality as a report from Geldof's Data organisation (Debt, Aids and Trade in Africa) was published. It said it was "deeply concerning" that only £1.5 billion of the additional £12.5 billion had been provided, despite half the five-year deadline having passed.

This was backed up by annual statistics from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development showing what wealthy nations were contributing to developing countries.

Much had been achieved with the money provided – the number of Africans on lifesaving Aids medication had risen from 50,000 in 2002 to 2.1 million last year, 59 million malaria nets had been distributed and 29 million African children are at school for the first time.

But the UK, which has recorded the biggest increase in spending of all the G8 countries, is almost £1.5 billion off its 2010 target of providing £3.55 billion a year to Africa by 2010. The UK's total aid budget to the whole world is due to hit £9 billion by 2010 – 0.56 per cent of national income.

The Gleneagles summit was meant to act as a wake-up call for the G8 nations, that the world was some way off hitting the United Nations' eight millennium development goals.

Set in 2000 and now endorsed by 190 countries, these include the aim to eradicate extreme poverty and hunger, achieve universal primary education, reduce child and maternal mortality.

But at this week's G8 summit, its leaders stand accused of "backtracking" on their financial promises to Africa. "If that money were on the ground, we estimate that five million lives a year would be saved," said Charles Abani, regional director for Oxfam in Nigeria.

AID: WHO'S DOING WHAT

CANADA

2010 TARGET: US$1.5bn
2007 AID: $904m
CHANGE SINCE 2006: -$88m
COMMENTARY: Off-track to meet its target. Ties with Germany as second-best for quality of aid, but not doing enough to help Africa trade with the rest of the world.

FRANCE

2010 TARGET: $7.5bn
2007 AID: $2.8bn
CHANGE SINCE 2006: -$66m
COMMENTARY: Has moved its aim of spending 0.7 per cent of national wealth on third-world aid from 2012 to 2015.

GERMANY

2010 TARGET: $6.2bn
2007 AID: $2.7bn
CHANGE SINCE 2006: +$311m
COMMENTARY: Off-track despite significant increases in aid to sub-Saharan Africa. Leader on water and sanitation, but needs to do more on education.

ITALY

2010 TARGET: $4.8bn
2007 AID: $1.1bn
CHANGE SINCE 2006: +$417m
COMMENTARY: Commitment is hugely ambitious, but country is hugely off track. Needs to guarantee long-term commitment, not just one-off payments.

JAPAN

2010 TARGET: Did not agree
2007 AID: $1.1bn
CHANGE SINCE 2006: -$197m
COMMENTARY: Has very weak commitment to sub-Saharan Africa, with contributions falling year on year for past two years.

UK

2010 TARGET: $6.5bn
2007 AID: $3.6bn
CHANGE SINCE 2006: +$48m
COMMENTARY: Has increased its spending on aid to Africa more than any other G8 country. May miss 2010 target, but not by much.

US

2010 TARGET: $8.8bn
2007 AID: $5.4bn
CHANGE SINCE 2006: +$413m
COMMENTARY: Off-track, but likely to hit 2010 target according to future spending plans. Leader on tackling HIV/AIDS and malaria.

RUSSIA

2010 TARGET: zero. Did not make aid commitment at Gleneagles, but promised to cancel $11.3bn of debt.
2007 AID: $210m
CHANGE SINCE 2006: +$110m
COMMENTARY: Impossible to calculate how much of its aid is spent on Africa.

Source: 2008 DATA Report

Link to full article. May expire in future.