News
Conservative Party launches manifesto
The Conservative Party has launched its manifesto for the 2010 General Election.
It includes a pledge to legislate to meet the international commitment to spend 0.7% of national income on aid from 2013.
The announcement is the main new commitment on international development in the document entitled ‘Invitation to join the British Government’.
The section entitled ‘One World Conservatism’ states that aid should remain untied from commercial interests, should be independently evaluated, published on the Department for International Development (DFID) website and in some cases supplied only in return for development outcomes.
Clean water, sanitation, healthcare, education and property rights are highlighted as spending priorities alongside improved access for women, children and disabled people. Aid would be targeted at poorer countries, paying particular attention to the Commonwealth. Programmes in Russia and China would be ended. Some aid would be spent in association with the armed forces as part of a ‘Stabilisation and Reconstruction Force’ to be deployed in countries where the UK military is involved. A small fund would be allocated according to the results of an online poll.
As part of the foreign policy section entitled ‘Promote our enlightened national interest’, the Conservatives state support for humanitarian intervention “when it is practical and necessary”. Under the headline ‘Building a Greener Economy’ they reconfirm the aim of reducing carbon emissions by 80 per cent by 2050 and pledge to work towards a global climate deal that includes adaptation funds for poor countries.
The Conservatives also promise to act on their belief in global free trade by supporting the EU’s trade negotiations with other countries, pushing for an international trade deal and gradually dismantling subsidies in the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy.
International Development excerpts from the Conservative Manifesto
Lucy Moore: Islam and Global Poverty
As with all great world movements or faiths, even a cursory look will show that Islam has simplicity at its heart, and complexity in its practice. It is simple and pure in its directives to believers; there are five pillars of your faith: Shahadah (Belief/Faith); Salat (Prayer); Sawm Ramadan (Fasting); Zakat (Alms Giving/Charity); and Hajj (Pilgrimage). Yet it can be complex in how these translate into everyday life – as Muslims we are one community but the schools of thought and traditions found within our faith are numerous, reflecting the complexity of human life and practices.No less may be true of the pillar of Zakat, the 2.5% of wealth that Muslims are directed to give to the poor. Ever striving to practice our faith in the best way, the community can rightly debate where Zakat can be spent – in your immediate community? Within the country you are in? In the Muslim community specifically? Within the Ummah (the worldwide Muslim community)? Or with the needy worldwide?
When looking at who should receive help through Zakat I recalled that the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) is reported to have said “If a single person were to sleep hungry in a town, then God’s protection is lifted from that town”. For me, this Hadith clarifies that the directive to feed the poor is not limited to those of your faith, but those within your reach, within your community; for me it is a narration that sits comfortably with my understanding of Allah’s infinite mercy and the Prophet’s grace and charitable nature, no matter who the recipient.
Turning to read this in the context of the 21st Century I can only feel that, in an increasingly globalised world, it is simply that our ‘town’ grows ever larger. We are now capable of affecting the lives of those we may never even meet in a way that was only vaguely conceived of in the time of the Prophet. This can be negative influence, but if Zakat is a touchstone, a pillar of our faith, as much as a practice, then surely we should strive to reach out to whoever is suffering, whoever they are and even though they may be far from us?
So how do I apply these fundamental principles when considering the UK General Election and in the context of the Vote Global manifesto?
It is clear to me that the requirement to give to those less fortunate, no matter how or where I do so, is a central part of my identity and beliefs as a Muslim. Hence, amongst other issues, the pledges and record of the parties on International Development, aid and support for the poor must also be a factor in deciding who I vote for.
There is a tendency for commentators talk in polemical terms rather than substantive ones, and so it may come as a surprise that there is actually consensus amongst the political parties on the need to meet our aid target of 0.7% of GNI.
There are variations of course. Labour and the Liberal Democrats plan to introduce legislation to meet our international commitments. Conservatives argue that funds should be provided only if development results can be shown. Plaid Cymru and the SNP argue they would be freed up to meet the commitment if their nations were independent and the Greens make the case for 1% of GNI being spent on aid, provided it is subject to the oversight and scrutiny of those it is intended to help.
This is where we need to start: by looking at the party policies and asking whether they compare to how we believe the UK should act. We need to read the pledges and manifestos, listen to the debates and, most importantly, use our votes.
The world is a complex place and I expect our next government to fulfil other roles as well as directing our International Development policy, and so this will not be the sole issue that determines who gets my vote. But at the very least let us make the UK’s aid and development record a key voting issue. For me, this is putting faith into practice, and remembering how the pillars of the Muslim faith can help us as we endeavour for justice in public life for all.
Lucy Moore is an anti-poverty activist with MADE in Europe
Ruth Bergan: Change Trade Not Our Climate
Too many politicians just don’t get it. They don’t get that it’s not OK to negotiate trade deals that lock millions of people into poverty. They don’t get that if we want to stop dangerous climate change, we need leadership and action, not weak agreements. More fundamentally, they don’t get that the mercantilist, free market global economy is leading us straight into climate chaos.Trade rules are still rigged against developing countries: developed countries continue to pursue the forcing open of developing country markets, promoting their own competitiveness at the expense of developing-country industries; agricultural subsidies in developed countries can make it impossible for farmers in developing countries to sell their goods.
Despite recent attempts at a revival, it looks like the World Trade Organisation (WTO) Doha round is going nowhere. In some ways this is a win for countries and civil society organisations who believe the Round has nothing to do with development, and everything to do with corporate vested interests. However lack of progress on Doha has been used by the EU and others to justify pursuing bilateral trade deals that push even deeper and broader liberalisation.
It has long been apparent that the promise of free trade delivering greater equality and less poverty is a false one, and now our governments want us to believe that this ideology can help tackle climate change.
In fact, the same international trade rules that are leaving millions in poverty stand to make it increasingly difficult for countries to respond and adapt to climate change. One example of this is the way that a number of countries are using the World Trade Organisation to pursue the liberalisation of energy services, which could place further constraints on the ability of governments to reduce reliance on energy imports or shift to sustainable energy sources. A second is the development of rules on the patenting of life forms that could prevent farmers adapting food production in response to climate change.
Yet the UK has consistently pushed for a conclusion to the WTO Doha round, which developing countries say will damage their economies, and the three major UK political parties are still wedded to free market economics and the belief that liberalisation is the answer to all ills, including climate change. This year’s General Election gives us all an opportunity to tell politicians it’s time for trade to change.
Liberalisation and the domination of corporate vested interests will lead to increased poverty and climate chaos, not sustainable development and climate adaptation. That’s why the Trade Justice Movement supports the Vote Global principle of reforming global institutions to make them democratic and responsive to the needs of poor countries.
Trade rules need to prioritise development and poverty reduction, and be geared to promoting mitigation and adaption to climate change. This is a key commitment under goal 8 of the Millennium Development Goals, the only one of the goals that ties developed countries to action and a goal that has been sorely neglected.
On Thursday 15 April the Trade Justice Movement is holding a public event, ‘Change Trade Not Our Climate’, an opportunity to hear from those on the front line to help us hold our politicians to account.
Ronnie Hall of the Global Forest Coalition (GFC) will describe why urgent change in the global economy is required if we are to tackle climate change; Meena Raman of Friends of the Earth Malaysia will talk about how civil society in the North and South needs to work together more effectively to tackle these twin crises; John Mawbey of the South African Municipal Workers Union will outline the double impact that trade policies and climate change are having on their members and Angelica Navarro, Bolivian ambassador to the UN, will talk about her priorities for a post-Copenhagen world.
Ruth Bergan is Coordinator of the Trade Justice Movement.
More details about the ‘Change Trade Not Our Climate’ public meeting.
