G8: Aid to development requires real commitment, says ActionAid

On the eve of the G8 summit hosted by Japan, the leaders of the eight world powers should look back in time so as not to forget the commitments made over the course of the years and the appeals made by the international community not to drop the challenge of fighting poverty.

The warning bell had been rung in April by Angel Gurría, the General Secretary of the organisation for economic cooperation (OECD) who, during the presentation of the statistics for international aid in 2007 (- 8% compared to 2006), had called on the rich countries to be coherent in the commitments made in past summits.

In his speech, Angel Gurrìa was careful to highlight all of the positive aspects and the importance of a more efficient resource management by part of both donor and beneficiary countries, but he had to conclude that there are still 40 million dollars missing if the objectives established by the Gleneagles Summit in 2005 are to be fulfilled.

The cyclical nature of commitments, when it comes to allocating funds for development is well known. There are moments when it is met with enthusiasm, others when there is greater criticism and reflection. Often, these are tied to the health of the global economy. Awareness that there is the need for great control of and responsibility towards the use of resources is widely accepted. In the debate over aid the principle of partnership that is incorporated in the eighth Millennium Objective, that calls for a Global Partnership for Development, can be seen to be a point of reference. The different players all have commitments to fulfil, among them is the need to collect the necessary resources for development, including aid.

We are referring to financing the fight against pandemics, the access to education, to water, to electricity, to the construction of infrastructure. The FAO summit in June highlighted that tens of millions of people risk falling into dire poverty as a consequence of the food price crisis. It was said that 30 billion dollars a year are needed to fight hunger, a possible goal if you think that at least 10 times as muchi s spent every year in subsidies to agriculture and that resources for weapons are 40 times as high as those allocated to hunger prevention.

During the same FAO summit, Italian President Berlusconi, faced by the seriousness of the crisis, said that: “It is important to set aside real resources for a common action based on economic contributions from all countries”. A call that should be appreciated, as should be the proposal that accompanies it, a proposal that asks for expenditure on aid for development should be treated differently within the European stability pact.

The challenge that Italy now faces is a difficult one, as the resources destined to development are far below the average allocated by other countries. In the G7 (excluding Russia) Italy lags behind Spain, Holland and Sweden.

The Italian challenge takes on an even greater importance in view of its role as leader of the G8, which will happen as soon as the summit in Tokyo takes place. The former prime minister Prodi’s government had begun to change the politics of aid, taking international commitments more seriously than before: it had invested a great deal into the 2008 global fund for AIDS, Tb and Malaria. What Action Aid now hopes is that Berlusconi’s government finds the way to ensure that Italy takes on its role in the fight against poverty.