Dialogue: Giving heartily to poorer nations more than charity

New Zealand's time has come to stand up as an Anzac leader and distribute some of its wealth to nations struggling in the global economy. The result will be to the benefit of us all. By FEDERICO MONSALVE*.

Overseas development aid has always been a bit of a mystery to many.

The idea of allocating a portion of a country's gross national product to help nations in need seems a forced token of charity and goodwill toward men; very much like being forced to share your toys with children who do not have many.

But to others, especially citizens of less developed nations, such aid represents their only livelihood and a means (be it monetary or in terms of human resources) to try to enter a market-driven, global economy.

A UN conference is taking place in Monterrey, Mexico, to discuss such issues.

How much of GNP and in which ways should the developed world fight to ensure social and economic development around the globe?

With political heavyweights such as Fidel Castro, George W. Bush and Ernesto Zedillo present, the conference is likely to be polarised.

One camp believes development aid is vital to ensure the economic and social survival of many countries.

The other thinks increasing aid to the private sector (by way of easing trade barriers and opening markets) as the only way to reach national development.

President Bush, through the US ambassador to the UN, John D. Negroponte, has made his agenda clear: it is domestic private capital and open markets that provide the major muscle to move societies into the modern world.

Although the US has just increased its level of development aid, it remains the world's lowest investor in this area (a mere 0.13 per cent of GNP) while concentrating on globalising its exports and opening new markets.

Castro, whose poverty-stricken island still suffers from the collapse of the Soviet Union and a lethal embargo, will most likely lobby others to increase development aid.

Japan's shaky economy has forced its Government to reassess its contribution. It also has strong suspicions that some of its aid directed to China is going into strengthening the military.

What, if anything remotely strong, is the New Zealand Government taking to the Monterrey conference?

New Zealand development aid policies have been lukewarm and bordering on complacency.

In July 1999 the Labour Party put out a document specifying its stand on overseas aid and development. Labour was to progressively increase the percentage of GNP devoted to aid towards 0.7 per cent.

Strangely, the total aid budget has decreased since 2000 by almost 10 per cent.

In the meantime, neighbours such as Vanuatu and Samoa continue their struggle to make ends meet in terms of infrastructure, education, health, and an equal playing field to join the modern world.

We do, nonetheless, spend 1.1 per cent of GNP on defence.

What are countries such as Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Vanuatu and the Solomon Islands supposed to do about their poverty, poor infrastructure, low literacy levels and escalating populations ?

Should they wait until the right market conditions miraculously present themselves or until the invisible hand of the market decides that a trickle-down effect will, miraculously again, reach those on the furthest fringes of society?

It is time New Zealand and even Australia began noticing the importance of development assistance and the benefits it brings not only to international communities but to our own.

What are the benefits of development aid for New Zealand?

If it is not enough to know that neighbours are bettering their living conditions, it has been proven that internal development is closely tied to migration cycles, gender equality and steady population control.

In a recent report, Unicef noted how higher literacy in Brazil brought an increase of gender equality and wider knowledge among women of birth-control methods and voting rights.

Likewise, migration cycles from countries such as Mexico, and perhaps even our neighbouring islands, are closely tied to lack of resources and work opportunities within their homeland.

What excuse is there for overseas development aid to remain at 0.25 per cent?

Can countries trade their way out of poverty?

Perhaps, but for poor nations lacking educational resources the only ones who will benefit from a global trade environment are those able to study abroad and the wealthy - who may or may not pass their earnings to internal development, to enhancing human resources or to providing an infrastructure allowing people to lead more productive lives.

Oxfam New Zealand, for example, has been working in East Timor, Bougainville, Fiji, Vanuatu and Papua New Guinea, ensuring that citizens get such basic things as running water, sanitation and community health education.

Projects such as these, partly or totally paid for by New Zealand, ensure children from poor communities do not have to trek for hours to the nearest river to collect water. It also gives them the basic tool of time to spend on their education.

Germany and the US have agreed to increase their aid and, although in terms of GNP, they are far from an acceptable level, the gesture is a sign of commitment and direction from two large nations.

It is high time the New Zealand Government took strong action on development aid.

With the newly instituted government agency NZAID, the opportunity now exists to improve the world from our own backyard and stand up as an Anzac leader on the matter.

The Monterrey conference is the perfect forum for New Zealand delegates to show their commitment on overseas development.

Unless the Government agrees to a realistic, strategic plan to raise our development aid, New Zealand will be ignoring the woes of our Pacific island neighbours.

* Federico Monsalve is the communications co-ordinator for Oxfam New Zealand.