ePolitix International Development Select Committee lunch

Tony Baldy MP spoke at the ePolitix Forum Lunch Club on current issues facing the Interantional Development select committee

Given the number of international summits that are held every year, much of the Select Committee on International Development's work is particularly pertinent. It is surprising in reports, however, that the Select Committee often makes the same recommendations for the next summit as we did for the last summit. It is also a truism that the Select Committee draws many of the same conclusions from the reasons for and response to international humanitarian crises whether those crises are Afghanistan or Iraq.

Iraq has dominated much of the Select Committee's work. Our first evidence session with the new Secretary of State was on Iraq and one of our recent evidence sessions with non-governmental organisations, such as Save the Children and Christian Aid, covered Iraq.

Our Select Committee published a report on the humanitarian consequences of war in Iraq just before negotiations on a "second resolution" ended.

Our report followed meeting in Washington and New York with Senators and Congressmen, the World Food Programme and the President of the World Bank. On our return flight we wrote to the Prime Minister. Much of our letter was reflected our report and much of what we said then still has salience now.

In our view "there are many reasons why the United Nations should take the central role. Some are criticising the United Nations for failure in the period leading up to war. But it was the nations of the Security Council that failed to find consensus over a second resolution. It is wrong to blame the professional agencies of the United Nations which must play the key peace-building role now." It will be interesting to compare how two years on the reconstruction of Afghanistan contrasts with that of Iraq. We will also be visiting another area suffering a humanitarian disaster in the Palestine and the Gaza Strip.

Our select committee has been at pains to stress how humanitarian crises exist outside of conflict. Southern Africa and the Horn of Africa are points in example.

Usually, when a Select Committee publishes a report, it does not prove to be timeless. That is not the case with the southern Africa report, and many of the lessons from the 2002 humanitarian crisis still need to be learned. That is particularly true of the three central recommendations on dealing with the underlying causes of food shortages in southern Africa. They relate to the HIV/AIDS pandemic, to early-warning systems and the co-ordination of relief efforts, and to Zimbabwe's role in exacerbating the region's food insecurity.

I appreciate that at the recent G8 summit in Evian, which was meant to be a summit of delivery for Africa, France put forward what has become known colloquially as the "Chirac plan" on EU subsidies and the UK and France made further commitments to the UN global fund on HIV/AIDS to help Africa: commitments that later failed to get support from other EU countries at the recent summit in Greece. Africa is in danger of becoming the ghetto of a globalised world, as Prime Minister Meles of Ethiopia said in evidence to the Select Committee. Africa is suffering an almost annual food shortage and is the only continent that is relentlessly moving backwards on the millennium development goals.

Africa is a prime example in our latest report on prospects at the WTO meetings in Cancun in September was published just as the Trade Justice Movement was lobbying every MP in their constituency in June. Cancun failed. Unlike other trade rounds, Cancun had not raised expectations only to lead to disappointment. Expectation was already low, not least on the part of developing countries. If the so-called CAP reforms were a signal of the EU's commitment at Cancun and if the US's Farms Act is an indication of their intent at Cancun, then there was little room for optimism.

I was in Cancun. Only two things were notable from the WTO meetings.

Firstly, an agreement known as TRIPS was reached to provide patented drugs more cheaply to developing countries.

Secondly, there was the solidarity of the G21 not to be forced into deals that disadvantaged the developing countries. Of the richer countries, however, there appeared little leadership and poor communication, particularly from the European Commission.

I expect developing countries are pretty tired of coming along to WTO meetings, only to watch the trade cake be cut up by richer world, with the poorer world being left crumbs. The UK government is talking a lot about development and we expect nothing less at what is meant to be a development round. But it needs to learn to listen to developing countries. That means don't broaden the agenda. Yet at Cancun the vital issue of agriculture was only allocated a few hours discussion in the Green Room whilst the wider agenda, or the so-called "Singapore Issues", were debated for days.

Just keeping the Doha commitments at Cancun will make this a genuine development round. Trade can often achieve more than aid. To make this a development round would be to bring $70 billion of new investment to Africa alone - that is five times what the continent receives in aid. Until that basic fact starts being the backbone to the US's and EU's motivations then sadly the WTO will not to be seen as the beneficiary to the poorer world it should.

Since our report was published, the Select Committee took evidence, for our follow-up report published this month on the lessons to be learnt from Cancun, from the EU Commissioner Pascal Lammy. He indicated that the "Singapore Issues" may still be put back on the table, despite the damage they did in September. Cancun is not the end, we can have more meetings on Doha development, we can have at least 12 more until 2015, if that is what governments want to do.