Banned Aid

by Eric Boa

Only a week to save the Poor

Now is not the time for charity. At least officially, as Governments swap aid for arms. In extreme cases whole aid departments have been wiped out. In February this year the website for the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) ceased to exist – apart from a terse statement announcing ‘notification of administrative leave. The budget for 2024 was $63 billion.

USAID’s demise is extreme but the trend towards defunding the poor is not. Successive UK governments have decimated our aid budget. The Conservatives began by reallocating funds to housing asylum seekers. This came on top of a cut from 0.7% to 0.5% of GDP post the Covid pandemic. Said to be temporary, it was never reinstated. The most cynical move was to move the innovative Department for International Development back to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. FCO became FCDO.

The UK aid budget has been cut further in recent months as funds are shifted into defence. The many agencies, NGOs and professionals who depend on aid funding are fuming, but there’s little they can do beyond decrying the declines. The public here in the UK and elsewhere have other more pressing priorities, from the cost of living and concerns about health and education. Even so, there’s no sign that fund-raising by charitable organisations has significantly declined in challenging economic circumstances.

I should qualify this. Most of the charity money raised in UK is destined for health matters, including running of hospices and cancer research. Animal charities do well, as does the National Trust, a guardian of ancient buildings and the countryside. All predominantly, if not solely, UK-centric. Significant amounts are also given to big international charities, but overall small by comparison. The likes of Save the Children International, Oxfam and faith-based NGOs such as CAFOD (Catholic) and Islamic Relief run extensive programs around the world. There’s a similar emphasis on human health and, increasingly, on climate change-related matters. Good stuff, but not enough without government support.

For further evidence that the public is concerned about aid, look to the showy events which periodically capture wide attention (and funds). Band Aid and its marathon offshoots have raised over £150 million and did much to alert people here in the UK to the plight of populations living difficult lives. Comic Relief continues efforts to highlight what can be done to improve vulnerable and impoverished communities here and overseas.

Maybe things are not so bad after all. While Governments give less for aid, civil society (think non-profits and NGOs) continues to show up and fill the gaps. I wish this was true. What I’ve called ‘aid’ so far is a complex beast. Providing food, shelter and other financial handouts for the those ravaged by conflict, natural disasters and fragile living conditions are at best sticking plasters on festering wounds. The roots of poverty are many and complex. The pressing needs of the weakest and most vulnerable mask deep difficulties in creating equitable societies, delivering better healthcare, making agriculture more efficient and balancing human needs with conservation of nature.

Reduced aid means fewer chances for long-lasting changes to everybody's lives (Tajikistan)

I’ve spent over 40 years working in international development. I began as a scientist – “good at asking questions” as Robert May, once the UK’s Chief Scientific Officer, pithily put it. What he and others meant is that scientists aren’t necessarily good at solving practical problems. I changed tack, fuelled by funds from international development agencies. I began trying to solve practical problems, working with big and small NGOs as well as national and local governments. Me and a cast of thousands. It’s a messy world and one that’s difficult to explain to people. Why try? Because I wanted to show that international development matters. I had limited success. My youngest son, who finally witnessed Dad working in Africa and America, belatedly said in his late teens “Now I understand what you do”.

The cuts to ‘aid’ are profound and hugely damaging. No more so than in the interfaces between conflicting areas, such as the use and conservation of biodiversity. How do you maintain forest areas, the major source of of biodiversity, yet allow adjacent and often resident rural communities to grow crops? My Only Connect colleague Mark Nicholson has explored these challenges and shown some of the successes that have been achieved. It’s a long-term problem which requires long- term study. And the more we ignore profound and fundamental challenges, whether it’s in nature versus man or creating stable primary healthcare systems, the more people and the planet suffer.

I have some hope that philanthropy will come to the rescue. Two of the world’s richest women have established their own foundations. Pivotal Ventures, founded by Melinda French Gates in 2015, “accelerates social progress by removing barriers that hold people back.” Mmm. Not quite sure what this means, though I’m impressed by the $2 billion it has spent in the US and the expansion of global initiatives to support women’s health. Bill, her ex-husband, plans to give his fortune away and to continue support for broad-based international development. Divorces are good for supporting the disadvantaged. Mackenzie Besos is also giving away lots of money to the deserving downtrodden through Yield Giving. Like Melinda, the emphasis is on the US and US Territories, though there are plans to expand internationally.

Good for them, and other foundations with noble intentions. I looked for information on what one of the UK’s wealthiest woman is doing with an estimated net worth of nearly £10 billion. Denise Coates is a little-known benefactor, perhaps because she generally remains largely outside the public gaze; her wealth comes from running a successful betting company. Never mind. The Denis Coates Foundation has reportedly given money to Oxfam and CAFOD, disaster relief in the Philippines and various dollops elsewhere in Africa. There’s no website, and like its founder, the Foundation is somewhat shy.

I’d like to appear hopeful. There is widespread support for helping poor and marginalized people live better lives, but poorly reflected in government policies. There are still major and active aid programs, for example the European Union. Rich people are also giving money away, some more comprehensively and constructively than others. As I attempt to prune my work papers I like to think I’ve also done something useful. I’m still avoiding the pessimism fired by a nagging feeling that I didn’t do enough. Better to remember the people I worked with and who will, Insha’Allah, continue to tackle knotty problems. Better to remember E.F. Schumacher’s* concise call to arms: “Find out what people do and help them do it better.” Every little bit helps.

* He wrote Small Is Beautiful, the guidebook to what became intermediate technology. Great title – though it was the publisher, Anthony Blond, who proposed it.