CUTS International | London Resource Centre | Projects | Soho to Soweto | Report on debate 1

Soho to Soweto - CUTS launches public orientated debate series

September 19th 2007 - Does Aid aid development

On September 19th CUTS LRC launched its newest project; “Soho to Soweto” a debate series designed to engage the British public with the most development issues facing the world today. We brought together a panel of experts, to psoe them questions about the whether aid realy does help tackle poverty. The debate was a resounding success; it was over subscribed a week before it started and and there was a really lively discussion.

The chair for the evening’s discussion was Heather Stewart, Economics Editor of The Observer and the four panellists were:

Andrew Mitchell MP Shadow International Development Secretary
Charles Badenoch Chief Executive of World Vision UK
Karin Christiansen Research Fellow at the Overseas Development Institute
Mark Wilson Executive Director of Panos London.

The first question “How effective was the G8 conference?” stimualted a good discussion across the panel. Andrew Mitchell described the 2007 G8 as a “Seminal moment” at put Aid at the top of the agenda Charles Badenoch highlighted the fact that we must work on ensuring that all the promises made at Gleneagles are respected, he pointed out that at the last G8 in Russia aid was not on the agenda at all.

In response to the question “Surely Aid is only treating the symptoms rather than the disease in relation to poverty?” the panellists generally agreed that the causes of poverty were myriad, and that aid can only at best assist development effrots not lead them. Christiansen pointed out that aid is not being dleivered or spent that effectively at present. Wilson pointed out that the IMF and World Bank must be made to be more accountable if we are to improve the situation in developing countries. Badenoch and Mithchell concluded that aid must be accompanied with strong political will if it is to further development.

One of our own staff, Susannah Christie, asked “If aid was not primarily given because it satisfied the emotional needs of the western nations rather than the financial needs of the developing countries”. A general consensus amongst panellists seemed to be that the world of NGOs and charities was one of harsh competition for funds. Charles Badenoch, who came to World Vision UK from the private sector, observed that he found less cooperation in the NGO world than in the private sector. Karin Christiansen talked about the need for NGOs to start to own up to the projects that did not work, and that only by educating the public and the donors could we learn from our mistakes and become more effective in our aid-giving.

A related question was also posed, “How can the NGO world truly help when there is rarely any collaboration?” Badenoch pointed out that government departments must facilitate NGOs trying to work together and that NGOs must not be punished if they come clean and admit that mistakes have been made. Christiansen stated that the lack of cooperation is a recognised problem, however little real changes are occurring on the ground and that the donor community must examine what they can do to improve cooperation. However the most effective method to bring about cooperation would be for recipient countries to insist that NGOs coordinate their activities.

Throughout the debate there was a surprising degree of consensus amongst the panellists, although there was, perhaps not surprisingly, no clear answer to the evening’s question.

The debate was smoothly wrapped up by Heather Stewart after an hour and a half, and after a brief concluding speech from Gideon Rabinowitz, everyone adjourned for refreshments and continued discussion. Many of the audience commented on how they had not heard of us before but were interested in our work, and several people expressed interest in becoming Friends of CUTS.

All in all the event ran incredibly smoothly, with the only hiccup being the late arrival of the red wine! An event for which the CUTS LRC team can rightly feel proud, as we look forward eagerly to the next debate.