|
| |
This piece was originally published in the Huffington Post.
We’ve all heard the adage that if you say something often enough, it becomes true.
Well, recently some parts of the media seem to have adopted this approach to trashing foreign aid, saying aid doesn’t work, and the public don’t want it.
This is dangerous. It’s dangerous because it’s wrong, and because could cost people their lives.
It’s wrong because aid can and is making a huge difference. Millions of lives saved by the Global Fund to Fight HIV/AIDS, TB and Malaria in the last decade, 4 million lives that could be saved in the next 5 years by the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunisation, 40 million more kids going to school than a decade ago.
It’s wrong because the public, when they hear these facts and see personal stories of transformation, get on board. The huge sums raised by charities are increasingly driven by such positive stories of progress. Comic Relief raised more than ever in 2011, and the public’s response to the East Africa famine was unprecedented.
The cynics in the media say that they public want foreign aid from the government cut – but they always forget to finish the sentence. They want it cut from what they think it is, anywhere from 15 to 25% of government spending, to 5 or 10%. Aid spending in the UK, USA, Australia, Canada or New Zealand is around 1% of government spending – a fraction of what people think it is, and a fraction of what people want it to be.
The danger in all of this is that these myths, left unchallenged, will have a real impact on the lives of the world’s poor.
When the media misreport on aid – saying that it doesn’t work and people don’t want it, and the public start to believe it. Members of the public repeat what they read in the papers to MPs, who in turn start to think that the public wants less aid. The media report on MP concerns over aid based on their own reports, and put pressure on the government to spend less.
The government spends less – cutting funding to life-saving interventions like vaccines for some of the world’s poorest children, reducing money set aside to respond to emergencies like last year’s famine, and the world’s poorest suffer.
As a movement of people who care about fighting extreme poverty, we cannot accept the demand of some media editors to balance our budget on the back’s of the world’s poor.
It’s a demand that’s based on untruth and misinformation, and we have to stand up and do something about it.
We need to take the proof that aid works out to our communities, and we need to show our politicians and media the full story when it comes to aid and development.
We need to argue that aid can work wonders – when it’s spent well. We have to acknowledge that aid isn’t always spent well, that corruption is an issue, and that we need to ask tough questions about value for money and impact – and that these are issues we should debate, not excuses to avoid giving aid.
We should be proud that our government has so far stood up the negative press, and kept their promises to the world’s poor and us on foreign aid. But we can’t expect them to withstand the barrage without more support from us.
As I write this, I’m on a train back from Plymouth in the south-west of England, having just spoken with a group of students about exactly this. They got it, as have people and communities all over the country. At the Global Poverty Project, we’ve spoken face to face with more than 100,000 people in the last two years, and the lesson we’ve learnt is clear:
Take the facts and the stories out to people, suggest a course of action, and they can do the rest.
 Join me in writing to your local MP to say thanks for the aid they’re giving, and urge them to keep up the good work by helping to save 3 million more lives from malaria.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
.png) Today we launch the 2012 Live Below the Line campaign. Braving the freezing conditions, over 40 Live Below the Line supporters took to Piccadilly Circus and joined Harry Potter star Bonnie Wright at a special dinner party with a difference. Sat ready for an elegant dinner, volunteers were instead treated to a single raw vegetable to highlight the lack of choice available to the 1.4 billion people living off less than £1 per day around the world.
The 2012 campaign is being led by six very influential UK charity partners, including UNICEF, Salvation Army, Christian Aid, RESULTS UK, Restless Development and Malaria No More UK. Over the next six months, Live Below the Line will be challenging thousands of participants who for 5 days will have £5 for all their food and drink, raising £500,000 for anti-poverty initiatives around the globe.
You can pre-register your interest using the form below or find out more here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
On June 15 2010, Ken Clarke was appointed as the UK’s international anti-corruption champion.
Personally appointed by the Prime Minister, Ken Clarke promised to work closely with colleagues, authorities and agencies to develop a strategy to combat international corruption.
According to him: 'The champion role sends out a clear message that the UK coalition government will not tolerate bribery or corruption.'
As well as sending out that clear message, Ken Clarke also promised that he would work ‘closely with colleagues across departments, devolved administrations, law enforcement, prosecution authorities and regulatory agencies to ensure a coherent and joined-up approach to combat international corruption.
To date we’re yet to see a ‘joined-up approach to combat international corruption’.
In short, a plan.
We’re calling on Ken Clarke to develop a plan
This is disappointing. Corruption is real and its effects are disastrous. As the Bond Governance Group argue in their anti-corruption paper,
‘Corruption has devastating effects on developing economies and their citizens’ quality of life. Its cost in Africa alone has been estimated at US$148 billion a year, representing 25% of the continent’s GDP. Corruption undermines economic growth rates and cripples public services, as money which should be destined for re-investment and public expenditure finds its way into private bank accounts, often abroad.’
Too often many consider the existence of corruption as a reason to do nothing. The reality is, there’s much we can do in the UK to combat corruption.
The paper identified a number of areas and opportunities that the UK has to fight corruption. For example, the first three that the paper raises include:
- Illegitimate payments: bribery of foreign public officials
- Lack of transparency in legitimate revenue payments by companies
- Illicit and harmful financial flows out of developing countries
These three issues demonstrate that there is much the UK can do to fight corruption. They are issues that deserve a ‘joined-up approach’ to address.
And they are the issues that we are campaigning on.
First, on July 1 the Bribery Act will come into force. This is a much needed update to Britain’s anti-bribery laws. However – the Act itself has been undermined by the guidance notes that the government released. By opening up huge loopholes the government has weakened the ability of the Act to address the very thing it is supposed to.
We’re calling on Ken Clarke to properly implement the Bribery Act
Second, transparency in the natural resource industry is critical to fighting poverty. Too often the wealth generated by the natural resources doesn’t go towards improving the lives of the very owners of the resources – the citizens themselves.
It was encouraging then to hear George Osborne agree that there needs to be greater transparency in the natural resource industries.
"As we enter a new decade when the resources of Africa are going to be heavily developed, I strongly believe it's in everyone's interests that mining companies and others operate to the highest standards. That's the way to ensure some of the world's poorest benefit from the wealth that lies in the ground beneath them. That's why I've raised the issue of new international rules at the G20 in Paris - the first time that's happened. And that's why Vince Cable and I will be arguing for an European agreement that matches the new standards just set in the US.”
Third, illicit financial flows rob countries of the funds they need to develop. Global Financial Integrity have calculated that between 1970 and 2008 Africa had lost $854 billion in illicit financial flows. That was the conservative estimate. The most generous estimate put the figure at $1.8 trillion.
Critically, they argue that our financial systems promote, perpetuate and exacerbate this problem. As their report points out
This massive flow of illicit money out of Africa is facilitated by a global shadow financial system comprising tax havens, secrecy jurisdictions, disguised corporations, anonymous trust accounts, fake foundations, trade mispricing and money laundering techniques.
Whilst they can appear overwhelming, the common thread running through these examples are the opportunities they provide for us to get involved, take action and demand a better outcome for the world’s poor.
Ultimately, overcoming extreme poverty will not occur by throwing loose change at the problem. Rather, it is the systems and structures that keep people poor that need to be changed.
And that’s where you and I step in.
That’s why we’re campaigning for Ken Clarke to announce the government’s strategy to combat corruption.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
On Wednesday the Government released guidance notes for the Bribery Act. This is terrific news.
We now have a Bribery Act and it will be coming into force on July 1. It is the first update to the UK’s anti-bribery legislation for over 100 years. We at the Global Poverty Project welcome the government’s announcement and we thank you for campaigning with us to have the guidance notes released.
In our campaign to have the guidance notes published over 300 of you sent emails to the Justice Secretary and No 10. They have listened.
Despite this positive outcome we nevertheless hold grave misgivings regarding the guidance notes.
According to the Justice Secretary the reason for the delay was due to the Evening Standard stirring him into action. As a result of this last minute lobbying from business groups, the guidance notes go far beyond a simple watering down of the Act. In fact the guidelines undermine both the spirit and intent of the Act which, after all, was originally passed under an all party consensus in November last year.
So here’s the result.
Originally the Act introduced two new offences. First, it became illegal to bribe a foreign public official. Second, a company would be guilty of bribery where it failed to prevent bribery occurring on its behalf.
Both of these crimes have now been completely undermined by the guidance notes. They open a huge loophole that allows companies to use subsidiaries to pay bribes to foreign public officials.
In addition, the guidance also exempts foreign companies listed on the London Stock Exchange from the remit of the Act. As long as they ‘carry on their business’ elsewhere, they won’t be covered by the Bribery Act. This is in direct contradiction to the Act.
According to Ken Clarke, ‘without changing the substance of the act’ the new guidelines represent a common-sense approach to tackling bribery. That’s the copout. He hasn’t had to change the substance to undermine and change the intended meaning of the Act.
Indeed, we now have a situation where the government’s guidance notes – their view of what the Act means in practice – contravenes a plain reading of the Act. It’s a capitulation to business interests and their intense lobbying campaign. It’s no surprise then to see the Confederation of Business Industry, the self-declared ‘voice of business’, welcome this ‘much-improved’ guidance.
Lobbying from vested interests and business groups has now undermined an Act that would have placed the UK as a leader in the global fight against corruption.
Lobbying from vested interests and business groups has undermined the democratic process. Just last year the Act was passed with a cross-party consensus. And more than that, the Act was passed just before the election in April. That’s right – moments before the parties were about to begin competing they came together recognising the need for a strong, broadly focused Act to fight corruption and defend British businesses that want to operate to a fair, ethical standard.
And it was passed following an extensive consultation with the business sector to begin with.
It’s no surprise to see the response from our friends at Transparency International and Global Witness. They both consider the Government’s guidance to be a white flag to last-minute lobbying - the result of which has opened up numerous loopholes in the Act.
Neither of them mince their words.
According to the Executive Director of Transparency International Chandrashekhar Krishnan the guidance notes are deplorable reading more ‘like a guide on how to evade the act’.
Global Witness is equally enraged considering the guidance notes to be a reprehensible cave in by the Government.
But it’s not all over yet.
Fortunately, Ken Clarke isn’t responsible for enforcing the Act.
In fact that role falls to the Serious Fraud Office (SFO). The SFO is an independent government department responsible for fighting major fraud and corruption in the financial system. In other words, they’re responsible for enforcing the Act against the companies that have been courting Ken Clarke.
Led by their Director Richard Alderman, they take a different view to the Ministry of Justice on the Bribery Act. They see it the way it should be seen.
According to Richard Alderman the SFO isn’t concerned with an ‘over-technical’ interpretation of the new law. Rather, the SFO views itself as having a wide jurisdiction to enforce the Act and ensure that ethical UK businesses are not disadvantaged by unscrupulous competitors.
And that’s what this is about.
Ultimately, we at the Global Poverty Project want to see UK businesses succeed on the basis of their high ethical standards. We recognise that business has a crucial role to play in the fight against corruption and we want our businesses to be world leaders in this. Corruption perpetuates and exacerbates poverty. It is a cancer and it requires all of us – individuals, governments and businesses – working together to combat it and end extreme poverty.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Over the weekend the Telegraph reported that the Bribery Act’s guidance notes are just days away from being released. Under pressure from the US government and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development the government is now expected to publish the guidance notes by the end of this week.
Whilst we’re happy to finally hear that the guidance notes are to be published, the government’s delay has been highly worrying. Passed under an all party consensus under Labour and receiving Royal Assent in April last year, the Bribery Act is long overdue.
As we’ve blogged, the Act has come under significant lobbying and criticism from the City of London, business groups, the London Stock Exchange and, not surprisingly the multinational chairman’s group whose members, according to the Guardian include BP, Shell, Diageo, Unilever and Vodafone. Indeed, John Cridland, the director-general of the Confederation of Business Industry, or as his biography describes himself, ‘the voice of business’ has argued that the Act is ‘not fit for purpose’.
What about the voice of those who suffer the cost and consequences of bribery?
Let’s not kid ourselves, bribery is real, serious and disastrous. It is fair that the government hears all sides concerned but it is of vital importance that all voices in the consultation period are heard.
That is what we, with you, have endeavoured to do. It is our goal to give a voice to those who believe that bribery, in all its forms, should be stamped out. It’s our government, and we deserve a say in how it operates and who it listens to.
And that is what the Bribery Act campaign is about. It’s us, ordinary everyday people, joining together to take a stand- to hold our leaders to account and to demand a better standard of accountable, ethical, governance. We don’t tolerate bribery in our personal lives so why should the government allow our businesses to operate in such a way?
With the Bribery Act, the Government has an opportunity to become a leader in the global effort against corruption. It’s an opportunity it shouldn’t waste.
That’s why we at the Global Poverty Project, along with our friends at Transparency International believe that the guidance notes, which form the basis of the Bribery Act, should be released without amendment and that the Act should be implemented as soon as possible.
That’s why over the past few months we’ve written blog articles, sent out numerous email campaigns, and worked closely with Transparency International in keeping a close watch on the government.
And now, we’re about to find out.
We will continue to keep you informed and updated as to the content of the guidance notes. We expect that with the release of the guidance notes the Government will demonstrate with action, and not words, its commitment to combating bribery and the corrosive effect it has on society, business and most importantly those who suffer its’ effects the most – the poor.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
