Labour Campaign for International Development

Tuesday 19 June from 6:00 PM – 7:30 PM - Committee Room 8, Houses of Parliament

LCID and the Co-operative Party are co-hosting this event on the transparency of commodity trading, food speculation and the price of food.

In a world where a billion people do not have enough to eat, we need to sort out the broken global food system. Spikes in the price of food are a major part of the problem, and the dysfunctional commodities markets are a major cause.

Banks are earning huge profits from betting on food prices in unregulated financial markets. This creates instability and pushes up global food prices, making poor families around the world go hungry and forcing millions into deeper poverty.

• Chair: Aditya Chakrabortty, The Guardian
• Chris Leslie MP, Shadow Treasury Minister and Labour & Co-operative MP
• Rushanara Ali MP, Shadow DfID Minister (tbc)
• Duncan Weldon, Senior Policy Officer, TUC
• Robert Nash, Private Sector Policy Advisor, Oxfam GB

This will be an opportunity to hear about hoarding in our commodity markets. It builds upon work the Co-operative Party and Treasury team have carried out through the passage of the Financial Services Bill and the European lobbying Oxfam have been involved in as part of their GROW campaign.

RSVP by clicking here!

by Richard Jolly. Richard is a Research Associate at the Institute of Development Studies at University of Sussex and former UN Assistant Secretary General.

European leaders pushing austerity as the solution to the current economic crisis are guilty of bad economics, bad arithmetic and ignoring the lessons of history. That’s not just my view but the considered opinion of a group of leading economists and social scientists expressed in a new booklet Be Outraged: There are alternatives.

It is obvious that the narrow range of austerity policies are bringing millions of people to their knees – in Britain, in other countries of Europe and in the world beyond. Our booklet sets out the case for alternatives – identifying what needs to be done and showing that some of these alternatives are already happening, especially in emerging countries.

The austerity approach to reducing deficits and debt is counterproductive; it is leading to a downward spiral of incomes and government revenues making it more difficult to reduce the debt and undermining growth prospects. The UK borrowing is already estimated to be £150 billion higher than planned. Across Europe ordinary people are reeling from a crisis that was caused by the profligacy of the banks and weak regulation of financial capitalism. Even as recession grips and millions of people face an uncertain future, top incomes have soared in the UK and US especially.

Consider this, the globe’s richest 1 per cent (61 million people) earn the same as the poorest 56 per cent (3.5 billion). More than 10 per cent of European adults are unemployed, up by 50 per cent since 2008. More than one in five adults under 25 are unemployed and in some countries this figure is over 40%. Now is the time for everyone, including economists, to stand up and argue for alternatives that address these growing inequalities.

We’re calling for a new economic approach that includes government action to promote growth and transform the financial sector from  “bad master to good servant”. We support activists around the world who are clamoring for a tax on financial transactions (also known as a Tobin or Robin Hood tax) to control speculation and act as a valuable source of revenue.

As Greece teeters on the brink of political and economic chaos, now is the time to shout for different economic policies to the failed austerity agenda. This week Europe’s leaders are meeting to discuss ways to boost growth across the continent as Greece teeters and just weeks after Francois Hollande was elected President of France promising more pro-growth policies. Europe needs urgently to escape from a trap where the screws of austerity are tightened while reductions of debt proceed ever more slowly or even increase. The challenge for Europe is not make up or break up –but WAKE UP- wake up to the needs of people and the opportunities for a change of course!

In our professional opinions there are alternatives – for Britain, Europe and all countries that currently imagine that government cutbacks are the only way out of debt. The fiscal stimulus agreed at the 2009 G20 in London restored recovery for a year, helping global growth reach 4 per cent in 2010. A new stimulus and renewed coordination is badly needed now.

Increased growth is important –but by itself is not enough. We also set out policies to increase in employment, to build caring economies on gender equality, to reduce inequalities to make possible a recovery for all, not just a few. Important for this are actions to make finance a servant and not a master of all. And international action is also vital, both to reform the International Financial Institutions and to strengthen the UN.

Download Be Outraged for free

Be Outraged contributors: Richard Jolly, Giovanni Andrea Cornia, Diane Elson, Carlos Fortin, Stephany Griffith-Jones, Gerry Helleiner, Rolph van der Hoeven, Raphie Kaplinsky, Richard Morgan, Isabel Ortiz, Ruth Pearson, and Frances Stewart

by Lord Jack McConnell

With over one billion people in our world living on less than £1 a day, the challenge of tackling extreme global poverty in our world can seem both overwhelming and, for many, far removed from our own reality. The solutions for this situation, like the reasons behind it, are complex and challenging. But it is unacceptable that, in the 21st Century, so many continue to live and die in such circumstances.

That is why I agreed to take part in Live Below the Line 2012.

For me, the Live Below the Line challenge serves as a small opportunity to bring the issue of extreme poverty directly into our daily lives here in the developed world.  Although it is one very small dimension of what is a daily reality for so many, eating and drinking for less than £1 a day is an enlightening experience itself. And it is also an opportunity to raise awareness and funds to tackle the issue of extreme poverty.

You can read more about my experience here.

Yes, I wanted to raise money and all the money I raised (over £13,000) will go towards a new youth project run by Positive Women, engaging young people in the UK to help young people obtain skills in Malawi and Swaziland. But I also wanted to raise awareness of this scandal: to keep it in the news, to provoke debate and answers questions, and to help build the movement that will end it in our lifetime.

A relatively healthy adult living in the UK (me!) eating and drinking for under a pound a day in no way replicates the life lived by those who have to provide everything for that amount every day. But it does highlight the issue, and it develops understanding too.

Extreme poverty directly impacts on education, productivity and work output – which in turn leads to less income, leading to more poverty, which then leads to even less income. This endless cycle of extreme poverty fosters ill-health and aggravates conditions like HIV/AIDS due to its direct attack on the malnourished and already struggling immune system. So food security and economic development are essential if improvements in education, health and social conditions are to be sustainable.

And yet, there are more than enough resources in our world to ensure everyone has a chance to live beyond the age of 5, or go to school or have a fulfilling adult life. No-one need live like this. But we do need the political will globally and nationally to make it happen.

Many lessons struck me during my 5 days in May. There really is a lack of choice – and even more so if something goes wrong with the foodstuffs you have chosen. Eating on this budget takes time, planning and energy in itself. And it is relentless, dull, and impacts on how you feel.

I began my LBTL 2012 on the day of the Queen’s Speech deliberately. It seemed a strong way to make the point – eating homemade soup and little else on the day when everyone else seemed to be enjoying special lunches – but I had also expected the government to include the legislation to secure 0.7% of GNP for aid and that would have been a great encouragement for the campaign. But it was not to be!

What a let down. They seem to have given in to the reactionary populists who exploit ignorance to whip up opposition to such a move. I really hope this is a short-term lapse in commitment. The all-party consensus on Overseas Development Assistance from the UK is so important for our global leadership on this issue. And it repays some of the damage from our colonial past.

Living Below the Line 2012 was not fun, but it did have its moments. Baroness Jenkin’s ‘soup kitchen’ in the House of Lords where all those taking part joined together for a 35p lunch; Baroness Jolly’s speech welcoming the Queen’s Speech mentioning our campaign; Come Dine Below the Line on the Channel Four website; and the sometimes totally unexpected generosity of friends old and new who supported my efforts.

But Living Below the Line is serious stuff for those who have no other choice. And, for them, this campaign will go on. Investing in agriculture, in infrastructure, in trade and better governance, in education and in health and clean water saves and transforms lives. We can change this situation, and we certainly have a moral obligation to try.

On Wednesday 13th June we will be holding our first LCID Reception with our Honorary Co-President’s Rachel Reeves MP and Baroness Glenys Kinnock.

It will take place from 18:30-19:30 in the CPA Room, Westminister Hall, Parliament, London.

We would be delighted if you were able to join us. Please RSVP on Facebook

The event is a thank you to those who have joined as Founding Members of LCID.

If you’ve not yet joined, please do! You can join for just £10 (£5 if unwaged) here.

This article was first published by The Fabian Society.

Two years ago, the G20 committed themselves to promoting inclusive and sustainable economic growth, having argued that ‘for prosperity to be sustained it must be shared.’ Yet as world leaders prepare to attend the next G20 Summit in Mexico next month, new data from Oxfam has shown that inequality has increased in all but four of the G20 countries. Oxfam’s Left behind by the G20? report shows that only South Korea, Brazil, Argentina and Mexico have managed to reduce inequality over the last two decades.

The stand out performer among that group is Brazil. Over the last decade Brazil has managed to marry impressive rates of growth with significant progress in reducing inequality – growth averaged 4.1% whilst the GINI coefficient fell by 4% between 2003 and 2010 – cutting the number of Brazilians’ living in poverty in half. Their progress is even more impressive when considering the nation’s history of high and entrenched inequality.

It is no coincidence that these successes have occurred under a social democratic regime. The flagship programme has been President Lula’s Bolsa Família, which continued under Dilma now reaches 46 million poor families, providing them with financial aid conditional on them ensuring their kids are vaccinated and attend school. It has even helped tackle child labour – illegal but still afflicting 7 million kids – by providing after-school activities to prevent children going to work when the school day ends.

Social democratic-run countries in Latin America have even been more successful at reducing inequality than their more left-wing counterparts, such as Venezuela, according to recent analysis by the US based Centre for Global Development.

Frankly, the policy recommendations of Oxfam’s report – calling for Brazil’s cash transfer programmes to be replicated, for investment to achieve universal health and education, progressive taxation, action to tackle discrimination against women and girls, and ensuring fair distribution of land and resources – read like they were lifted from a Partido dos Trabalhadores’ manifesto.

Brazil’s progress on reducing poverty and inequality didn’t happen by chance. It didn’t happen because of statistics or facts, however compelling. It didn’t happen because of petitions or protests, however weighty or loud. It happened by choice – political decisions taken by progressive politicians in elected office.

And the sad truth is that – as a charity – Oxfam cannot say as much. That is not to ignore the powerful role protest movements can play in bringing about change, from the Arab Spring to the anti-Apartheid and Indian independence movements. But what makes Mandela such an inspiration is not just his courage through those 27 years behind bars – but his leadership in the 5 years he was President – introducing free health care, increasing schooling, and building new houses. And whilst Gandhi is rightly revered the world over, it was Prime Minister Nehru who took the hard and difficult decisions needed to keep a deeply divided nation of millions together and at the same time create jobs, criminalise caste discrimination and introduce universal primary education.

In the UK the Make Poverty History campaign was incredibly successful, and as a former campaigner with Oxfam myself I have always looked up to those who worked on it and felt humbled by their achievements. But if we are honest the true success of that campaign was in creating a (very large) space for politicians to act. If we had not had politicians with the power and the will to act – or in other words if we had not had a Labour government – we would not have achieved the dropping of debt and aid increases that have transformed so many millions of lives. Ultimately, when those deals were being thrashed out in G8 meetings it was not Bono or Geldof who forced world leaders to sign on the dotted line but Blair and Brown.

Increasing inequality is entrenching poverty, rising unemployment is hampering aspirations, damaging climate change is devastating communities. These are global problems requiring global solutions – co-operation, Keynesian economics, progressive taxation, fairer trade, green jobs, universal health and education, social protection.

These are social democratic solutions based on social democratic values. Yet it is left to global civil society to advocate them – and as they will never stand for office they will never have the power to implement them. Which means we – the social democratic left – need to get our act together and fill that vacuum.

Easier said than done, unless of course you believe in the power of wallpaper pasting tables, copies of the Socialist Worker and yelling “Workers of the world unite” until you are (some would say ironically) blue in the face.

The decision of who to support is hard enough – and somewhat messy. There was much to celebrate in January when the ANC reached it’s 100th birthday, but no one should be comfortable with the elitism at the top of the party or demagoguery of its youth wing. The current Indian National Congress government has made education free and introduced programmes to guarantee employment and health in rural areas, but they have seen inequality rise on their watch and found themselves on the wrong side of the argument on corruption. Rwanda has made massive strides under President Kagme’s leadership but it has also seen political rights curtailed – do we believe a strong-man is needed to keep together the country after the genocide or do we withdraw our support? Why an earth did Socialist International allow Muburak’s party to be a member for so long? Who do we support in countries where ethnic division and big personalities matter more than policies or values?

So understanding the politics must be starting point, and I hope the Labour Campaign for International Development (LCID) can begin to do some of that analysis. Beyond that we could look at what we as sister parties can do practically to support each other better. How can we modernise Socialist International and make it fit for purpose? How can we up-scale the great work the International Office of our Party is doing through the Westminster Foundation for Democracy to support sister parties across the developing world? And what can we learn from them and programmes like Bolsa Família as we plot our return to power in the UK? The Young Fabians will run a trip to the US later this year to help Obama be re-elected – why not a trip to help PM Singh’s INC retain control of the Lok Sabha? I hope LCID can organise one in the future.

Of course the first priority for all Labour Party members is to get our Party back in Government. But we should put aside at least some energy to how we can better work together with social democratic parties around the world.

It is in our national interest to do so – because so many of the challenges we face in the UK require global solutions. But it is also an important part of our identity, and one of the reasons Blue Labour’s ‘flag and family’ mantra jarred with so many of our members– for internationalism is in our Party’s DNA.

We want the boy who begs on the streets of Bangalore to have the same start in life as the girl with a Sure Start centre at the end of her road in Brixton. We want the guy who works on the checkout of the Walmart in Wyoming to have the same union rights the bloke at the BMW factory in Berlin. And we want the honourable member for Feltham & Heston to have as many female colleagues as the member for Kigali Central in the Parliament of Rwanda.

‘Left behind by the G20’ is a must-read report. Perhaps ‘Left in power in the G20‘ is the report that needs writing next.

David Taylor @DavidTaylor85 is the Chair of the Labour Campaign for International Development - lcid.org.uk | @LabourCID

The government once again failed to introduce legislation committing the UK to spending 0.7% of GNI on international development in the Queen’s Speech today. Unlike all the broken promises of the past, this has life or death implications for world’s poorest people.

As the Independent reports:

The coalition agreement stated that Britain would meet the United Nations target from 2013, and would make it a legal requirement to stick to the commitment.

The Conservative manifesto for the 2010 election said a Tory Government would legislate in the first session of Parliament to lock in this level of spending from next year.

But there was no Bill in the legislative agenda for 2012-13 set out by the Queen in Parliament this morning.

The Queen told MPs and peers: “My Government has set out firm plans to spend 0.7% of gross national income as official development assistance from 2013. This will be the first time the United Kingdom has met this agreed international commitment.

Melanie Ward, head of public affairs at development charity ActionAid, said the Government deserved credit for protecting the aid budget.

But she added:

“It is extremely disappointing that their promise to enshrine the 0.7% commitment in law did not appear in the Queen’s Speech. This is a promise from the coalition agreement and which was in the manifesto of each of the main parties. We expect the coalition Government to keep its promises.

Legislation matters because aid needs to be around long enough to do the job. Many countries, such as Ghana, are now moving towards an end to dependency on aid but this can only happen if we support them until that point.

Legislation would provide the certainty that is needed for aid to be most effective.

The world is watching the Prime Minister’s actions on international development because he is co-chairing a UN taskforce to decide what will happen when the Millennium Development Goals expire in 2015.”

Ivan Lewis MP, Labour’s Shadow International Development Secretary, commenting on the Queen’s Speech today, said:

“Failing to include 0.7 legislation in the Queen’s Speech breaches promises made to the electorate both in the Tory manifesto and the Coalition Agreement. UK aid and development is about standing up for global social justice but is also about Britain’s national interest.

David Cameron used the promise of legislation as a key symbol of how he had changed the Tory Party. It has now become a symbol of how he has become a prisoner of the right and is unable to change his party.

There will now be growing concern about whether the Tory-led Government intend to honour their commitment to spend 0.7% of Gross National Income on development assistance by 2013. I will be seeking urgent reassurance from Andrew Mitchell that this remains the policy of the Government.”

See also:

Huffington Post: http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/05/09/aid-pledge-failure-disappoints-development-charities_n_1502344.html?1336564059

The Independent: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/the-queens-speech-government-fails-to-meet-aid-pledge-7728332.html

Left Foot Forward: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/the-queens-speech-government-fails-to-meet-aid-pledge-7728332.html

Lord Paul Boateng travelled to Ghana for World Immunization Week (21^st – 28^th April), to celebrate the country becoming the first African country to introduce pneumococcal and rotavirus vaccines at the same time, simultaneously tackling the leading causes of the world’s two biggest childhood killers – pneumonia and diarrhoea.

Globally, pneumonia and severe infant diarrhoea together take the lives of more than 2.7 million children under the age of five each year. In Ghana, these killer diseases together account for approximately 20% of the country’s under-five child mortality.

Lord Boateng visited the country where he grew up and where more than 50 years ago he received an inoculation against Polio, which is now eradicated in Ghana, in this video he highlights what he found in Ghana.

The rollout in Ghana has been made possible through the work of the GAVI Alliance. The GAVI Alliance is a Geneva-based public-private partnership aimed at improving health in the world’s poorest countries. The Alliance brings together developing country and donor governments, the World Health Organization, UNICEF, the World Bank, the vaccine industry in both industrialised and developing countries, research and technical agencies, civil society, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and other private philanthropists.

Since 2010, GAVI has already helped introduce pneumococcal vaccines in 16 developing countries and rotavirus vaccines in five countries. By 2015, GAVI plans to fund the introduction of the vaccines in a further 21 and 15 countries respectively reaching more than 50 million additional children.

Lord Boateng was involved in supporting the GAVI Alliance during his time at the Treasury and is pleased that the work under the Labour Government is being carried on by the Coalition.

By Gareth Thomas MP, Shadow Minister for Civil Society and Minister for International Development until 2010

Today, people around the world are marking World Malaria Day to celebrate the progress that has been made towards eradicating malaria, and to commemorate those who have lost their lives to the disease. Huge progress has been made in the last decade, with global cases of malaria falling by 26% in that time.

Under Tony Blair’s leadership, Britain helped to set up the Global Fund to Fight HIV, Tuberculosis and Malaria in 2002. Malaria is preventable and treatable, and the Department for International Development played a leading role under Labour in supporting the Global Fund’s vital work – distributing insecticide-treated nets to prevent the spread of malaria, and increasing the number of anti-malarial treatment courses available worldwide, from 11 million in 2005, to more than 170 million in 2010.

Sadly, this momentum is now under threat, as the Global Fund is struggling to cope with a funding shortfall. Britain currently chairs the Global Fund, and Andrew Mitchell should use this opportunity to persuade other donors to help plug the gap in funding. The theme for World Malaria Day this year is ‘Sustain Gains, Save Lives: Invest in Malaria’, and it is vitally important that the momentum built up over the last decade is maintained, or there is a serious risk that the gains made will be lost.

Kevin Watkins, co-author with Rt Hon Gordon Brown MP of a major new report on education in South Sudan last week, has warned of the consequences of aid to South Sudan being cut as a result of the oil dispute with Sudan. He writes for the Guardian’s development blog;

How should aid donors respond to the crisis? The UK has already voted with its aid programme. The international development secretary, Andrew Mitchell, has made it clear that in the event of failure to get the oil flowing again DfID will cut long-term development assistance and shift resources into humanitarian emergency support. The all-party international development committee has given this approach a ringing endorsement, warning that Britain’s taxpayers could not be expected to “bankroll South Sudan through this austerity period“.

This is bad advice. DfID is one of the largest donors in South Sudan. It accounts for around one-fifth of total budget spending on basic health provision and is a major source of finance for education, with a flagship programme on girls’ education. Any cut in long-term development funding will mean fewer children in school, fewer people getting access to healthcare and education – and more kids like Frezer dying for want of affordable treatment and skilled health staff.

…cutting long-term development aid to leverage peace is the wrong approach, which is why donors such as the US and Norway have been lukewarm in their response to the UK’s move.

It is critical aid donors come together to forge a strategy for protecting basic services and building on the fragile gains made.

Read the full article here.