| In his recent book, The White Man’s Burden: Why the West’s Efforts to Aid the Rest Have Done So Much Ill And So Little Good, New York University economist William Easterly laments how the developed world has spent 2.3 trillion dollars U.S. on international aid since the 1950s to produce little marked improvement in the quality of life in the world’s poorest countries. The book outlines how huge top-down plans, bureaucracy and a lack of accountability have led to the squandering of unfathomable sums of money.
Some of Easterly’s suggestions for improvement are having aid agencies specialize so they can be accountable for specific and measurable goals, discarding accountability-free goals and having "searchers" on the ground who can effectively allocate aid in idiosyncratic circumstances. In essence, Easterly is proposing a move away from grand schemes and bureaucracy and towards aid spending that is targeted to specific situations and accountable to certain goals.
"The good news about the noisy anti-globalization protesters," writes Easterly, "the hard-working NGOs, the rock bands and the movie stars and the rich-country governments’ increased interest... is that the constituency for the poor is growing. It’s time for the rich-country public to insist that aid money actually reach the poor."
There is a little publicized bill — Bill C-293 — being voted on in Canada’s parliament this month that seeks to implement some accountability and circumstance-specific planning into Canada’s foreign aid policy. The bill, dubbed the Development Assistance Accountability Act, seeks to improve Canada’s aid giving by adding a measure of accountability, and a review process for aid that is not working.
If Bill C-293 is passed, Canadian development aid may only be given if the minister responsible feels that the project: a) contributes to poverty reduction; b) takes into account the perspectives of the poor; and c) is consistent with Canada’s international human rights obligations. Other provisions within the bill include the founding of a committee of members experienced in poverty reduction, human rights and sustainable development, that will help the ministers to exercise their powers and to conduct reviews. It would also see the creation of a petition process where any citizen of a country receiving Canadian development aid can file a petition — that must be regarded — if they feel that the aid being given is not meeting the required criteria. As well, an annual reporting process would be created where all actions, results, petitions and reactions to petitions must be reported to Parliament.
With the current Conservative government pledging to increase foreign aid by 425 million dollars over the next five years, Bill C-293 is a step in the right direction. Canada needs to start thinking about providing better aid before it starts thinking about providing more aid, lest those additional millions end up missing their target as so many billions have before.
The proposed bill is a move towards results-based development aid that ministers are accountable for, and that can be reviewed and challenged. But the bill is only a small step in the right direction. Leaving much up to the opinions of government ministers and their chosen advisers, the bill far from guarantees against the misspending of development dollars. And currently its passing in Parliament is far from certain.
At the bill’s last reading in Parliament, the Conservative government voiced reservations about it, and it looks possible that the Conservative party will stand against it when it is voted upon this month. Now forming the government, the Conservative party dislikes the fact that the bill may force some restraints and accountability on some of its ministers. However, the party also raised some valid criticisms when the bill was last debated in parliament, such as Ted Menzies’ — current Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Cooperation — comment that, "the mandate of the committee would place it in an unavoidable conflict of interest. For example, the committee is to advise the Minister of International Cooperation on the exercise of his or her power and then subsequently review and report on its own advice. This is a conflict of interest."
Menzies’ comment is poignant, and it points to the backwardness of using a top-down plan that creates a new bureaucratic committee to solve problems that largely stem from the inefficiency of government bureaucracy.
Yet, before the Conservatives won the last election, Stephen Harper co-signed a letter along with the leader of the NDP and the Bloc Quebecois to the Liberal government calling for the type of legislations now being proposed:
"We are writing to urge you to introduce legislation which establishes poverty reduction as the aim for Canada’s Official Development Assistance (ODA). A legislated mandate for Canada’s ODA would ensure that aid is provided in a manner both consistent with Canada’s human rights obligations and respectful of the perspectives of those living in poverty.
"In our view, this legislation should include an unequivocal statement of purpose that poverty reduction is the central lens through which Canada’s aid program should be delivered."
Bill C-293 is a step towards ensuring that Canada’s foreign spending is devoted to reducing poverty. It will encourage ministers to seek out the opinions of development aid experts, and it will force them to be more accountable with their spending. Through the review process, those people on the ground in developing countries will be able to make their opinions known to those making the decisions. It’s clear that at one time or another all four major Canadian political parties have called for this legislation. It’s time that we started making those billions go somewhere. |
Copyright ©2006 FFWD. All rights reserved.