Mission Impossible? The FULL interview.

 

Loads of you write to us about issues affecting poor countries.
So we sent Caris reporters Rachel Butcher, Lily David and Nadia
Sulaimer to interview Douglas Alexander, Secretary of State for International Development

Rachel: First of all, can you tell us about yourself? Why did you so want to be Sec of State for International Development?

Because I think it’s a job where you can really make a difference. I grew up in a family that — because of its involvement in the church — was very interested in development issues, so it’s a subject that I’ve cared about and been interested in for a very long time. And if you get the chance to lead the department that’s leading the British Government’s efforts to tackle poverty then it’s something really exciting.

Lily: What do you think were the main achievements of your predecessors? What do you want your legacy to be?

I think the legacy of my predecessors over the last ten years has been to establish the department which is pretty widely now seen as the best bi-lateral aid agency in the world. That means that in the UK we spend British money very effectively to tackle global poverty. In terms of my legacy, it’s a little early to be deciding. But it would probably involve deepening and broadening the public support for development and the work of this department in the minds of the British people; ensuring that we continue to deliver our aid effectively, [and] broadening the other ways that we support countries that are developing.

Lily: What are you going to focus on in terms of the Millennium Development Goals?

It’s hard to differentiate between the MDGs because they all represent really important tasks and really important goals. We’ve had a big focus, in this department in recent years, on health and education and we’re keen to continue to make progress in ensuring that 72 million children around the world who don’t have a school to go to today have that primary education. We’ll continue to work with others to ensure we get that outcome.

Nadia: [After the election violence erupted in Kenya earlier at the end of last year] the UK announced it would give £1million to Kenya and a further £1.2 million aid to those affected. Is there likely to be any more given?

Both of those announcements were made in the light of appeals that were issued from Kenya about the humanitarian problems that [arose] due to the terrible violence. We will of course consider further calls for help that we receive from the people of Kenya. But those particular announcements are part of a much bigger effort. We spend about £50-million a year on development in Kenya. Last November I had the opportunity to visit Kenya and see the difference that we’re making — for example, providing mothers and young children with malarial-treated bed nets so that they can sleep safely at night without the risk of infection.

Lily: Kenya is the joint 8th most corrupt country. So what confidence can the British taxpayer have in that all the money gets to where it should?*

We look very carefully at the effectiveness of what’s called public financial management (ie. how the Government spends its money) when we decide what the best route to channel British taxpayers’ money is. And, as I saw in Kenya, we have a range of different mechanisms in place to ensure that British taxpayers’ money is spent properly.

Editor: What are those?

I was just about to say. One of the things we do is we have external audits by bodies outside of the Kenyan Government looking at how money is spent. Secondly, we have what’s called “tracker studies” where we will follow the packet of money that’s provided at the centre right the way through to it being spent, whether in a health clinic or in a school. And, thirdly, we also use the views of the Kenyan public. I visited a school in Kenya in November and saw for myself a poster on the school door which set out for the parents of that school the amount of money the Kenyan Government had committed to spending at that school, what they were going to buy in terms of teachers, books, classrooms. And that would allow the parents themselves to know whether the money was being properly spent or not. So we’ve got a range of different mechanisms to make sure that the money is spent properly — and the money is directed towards the needs of the Kenyan people, rather than the needs of the Kenyan government.

Editor: Do you ever lose money?

We constantly need to be vigilant in terms of how British taxpayers’ money is used. There is often a connection between poverty and corruption, so we are always looking at our systems and at what further steps can be taken. But I think there’s been real progress made in recent years in this department, which is why organisations like the OECD have been so complimentary of how Britain spends its aid money.

Lily: Fairtrade Fortnight. What [does] your family do to support it?

Fairtrade and ethically-produced products now support about seven-million individuals in many of the world’s poorest countries, so small actions by consumers here in Britain can make a very big impact on the lives of people right round the world. For my own family, we use fairtrade tea and coffee and chocolate biscuits, so I think we’ll carry on the pattern of consumption that we’ve developed over recent years, and encourage other people to do the same.

Lily: Within your constituency are there any towns that are Fairtrade towns? Do you think it makes a difference?

Yes, I represent the town of Paisley, and it was the first Fairtrade town in Scotland. We worked very hard to get it established as a Fairtrade town, and I do think it’s having an impact. In my own office, in Paisley, my constituency office, we are a Fairtrade office: that means we serve fairtrade tea and fairtrade coffee. The Council has taken significant steps in that direction as well, [and] we now have a shop selling ethically-produced goods called Rainbow Turtle, in the centre of Paisley, which is supported by a range of local churches. So, yes, I think designation as a Fairtrade town can make a difference and it’s an important contribution to increasing people’s awareness of fair-trade products.

Lily: Are you working to set up more Fairtrade towns?

Well, it’s the Fairtrade Foundation that actually designates a town or county as a Fairtrade town or Fairtrade county. But we’re working closely with the Fairtrade Foundation and the Fairtrade Labelling Organization and at the beginning of [this year’s] Fairtrade Fortnight [I made] an announcement of more support we’re providing for the year ahead — a significant increase in funding to the Fairtrade Labelling Organization, which is the international body of which the Fairtrade Foundation is part.

Nadia: A few years ago we were campaigning to Make Poverty History. Do you think rich countries are really committed to this (or to just their own interests). Do you think it is possible to MPH?

Along with many, many others I took part in the march in Edinburgh on July 2, 2005 to appeal to world leaders to make poverty history. We took seven bus loads of people from churches across Paisley. That was a very eloquent statement on behalf of the whole people of the United Kingdom: that they wanted international leaders to recognise their responsibilities. Since then there has been real progress made, but, as I said at the time, making poverty history is not the work of a weekend; it’s the work of a lifetime. So, we need to continue to pressurise other international partners to meet the promises that they made at Gleneagles, in July of 2005. The British Government is keeping its promises, but we need to work to encourage others to meet their promises as well.

Rachel: The world’s economy is based on increasing consumption year-on-year. Yet the ecological crisis were facing NOW will only be mitigated by a drop in consumption. Is your department at odds with the rest of Government policy? Is there a conflict of interest?

The most comprehensive study of the economics of climate change was produced by someone called Sir Nicholas Stern, which said that it was possible both to continue to grow the economy and to significantly reduce carbon emissions if the right action was taken early. And in that sense, I agree with that analysis and other departments across government also agree with that analysis. It makes the case for taking decisive action to ensure that here in the UK, and around the world, we set a course towards a low carbon economy. What I’ve learnt as development secretary is that climate change is not a distant threat for many people in the world, it’s a present reality. So I think I’ve got a clear sense of the urgency of taking the kind of actions that were recommended in the Stern Review.

Nadia: Do you think it’s ok to buy, say, Kenyan beans or roses, given the air miles? Or should we buy local and seasonal? And what do we do to help support African farmers?

We’ve looked quite carefully at the issue of. . . let’s take flower production in Kenya, because some people have suggested that because they’re being air-freighted, people in Britain shouldn’t buy [them]. But, actually, if you look at the cost in terms of energy and the carbon genera rated of heating greenhouses, whether in the UK or the Netherlands — which has a large flower production industry — that actually generates more carbon than growing flowers in natural conditions in East Africa, and then flying them by plane back to UK. So, I’ll be encouraging people to support African flower producers, because in recent years we’ve seen that industry develop very successfully. Of course, we need to continue to look at all of these issues, but when we’ve looked at the science, and the impact of flower production in East Africa rather than northern Europe, we feel that it’s an environmentally responsible course to support East African flower producers.

Editor: What about food?

Well, again, it has to be based on the science, in terms of both conditions in which food is grown here in the north, and the conditions in which food is grown in the south. It clearly will be dictated by the artificiality of the conditions: the amount of fertilizer; the energy costs. There’s a whole range of inputs that need to be considered.

Editor: How can consumers know what [product] is a good choice environmentally? Should there be a code?

I’ve always argued, and have long argued, that we need to do better at the labelling, so they can make informed choices. I think that’s true, both in terms of the environment and also in terms of conditions in which goods are produced. That’s why were supporting the Fairtrade Labelling Organization. That’s why I’m supportive of some of the steps that have been taken around making sure that people have information, for example, about different modes of travel. When I was the Transport Secretary I encouraged the establishment of a website that let people know what their carbon footprint would be — whether they were travelling by bus, or by train, or by car, or by plane. It seems to me that consumers nowadays do want that kind of information, and there’s more that can be done in that field.

Editor: So do you think there will be a code for goods that are imported? Is that something you’re considering?

It wouldn’t be for DfID alone to take these steps. But the whole issue of labelling is an issue that’s being looked at by the Government. But also it wouldn’t simply be for the UK Government, given that it’s an area involving European law as well.

Lily: Clare Short was vocal on arms control in developing countries, and you’ve said that conflict is linked to poverty. What is your department doing to stop the traffic of small arms, particularly the sale of AK47s, into the hands of child soldiers?

Well, the British Government is sponsoring and seeking support for an arms trade treaty specifically around the issue of small arms. It was in our manifesto previously, in 2005, and we continue to seek to secure international support for an international treaty on small arms.

Rachel: I am concerned about child labour in parts of Africa and Asia. What difference has the Government’s international development policy made to child labourers? And what difference do you hope to make in the future?

At a very basic level we want children not to have to be suffering poor living conditions when they should be in school, which is why we’ve worked so hard and spent money to ensure that there are educational opportunities for young children. When user fees were abolished in a country like Tanzania, a million more kids turned up to school. So, we need to look at what are the reasons why people at the moment [are] still willing to let allow their children to work in these conditions, rather than have the opportunity to provide an education for them. That’s partly about helping to raise their income, so they don’t have to rely on children having to work in these conditions for the household income; it’s partly about providing schools and incomes and classrooms so that they have those opportunities; and it’s also working with other international partners to try and get international agreements [on] guidelines as to how companies conduct themselves.

Nadia: I understand DfID is trying to raise awareness of gender equality. Is DfID planning on opening any schools for female students abroad?

It wouldn’t be for us to dictate what the policies of sovereign governments should be, in terms of how they organise the educational system. But, on the other hand, we have been very clear in our discussions with governments in poor countries that we want to see education prioritised for young girls. A good example of that is in Afghanistan, when back in 2001 there were only 900,000 boys in school. In Afghanistan there were no girls allowed to go to school. Now, with the democratically-elected government of Afghanistan, we’re working to provide teachers, to provide books, to provide classrooms. And that explains why there are now five-million children at school, more than two-million of them young girls. So, of course we work very closely with governments to make sure that there are real opportunities for young girls.

Rachel: What have you seen or experienced in other parts of the world that has made you change the way you live? And how have you changed?

I think the way I talk about the challenge of development has changed already. When I came to this job, I had worked in a school building project in Kenya; I had travelled to India; I had seen some real poverty. But, I think I still expected to be conscious of just how different people’s lives were in circumstances of abject poverty. And what’s been most striking to me, is that even where people are living lives of abject poverty, I’m struck by how similar they are to those of us who are living in Britain: whether it’s their aspirations for their children to get an education [or] whether it’s a broader sense of what they would like for their own life: the chance to have meaningful work, the chance to be able to raise their children, the chance to have physical security. Their aspirations are very similar to people here in the United Kingdom, and, I think and hope that I reflect that in how I talk about the work that I do on behalf of the Government, when I get back here to the UK.

Nadia: With regards to educating young people in the UK about international development, do you think enough is being done to make young people aware and willing to get involved? If not, what do you think needs to be done?

Well, the future of the world is going to be shaped by the young people of today. We’ve got six billion on this planet at the moment. It will go up to nine billion by 2050. About three billion [of the population are currently] under 25, [and] in the hands of young people lays the future of the planet so it’s incredibly important that young people here in Britain are educated in a way that reflects the fact they will be global citizens in terms of how they live their lives; in terms of the connectedness that Britain has to all parts of the world today. An awareness of how other people live their lives around the world, and about how quite connected Britain is to the fates and the fortunes of those people is a very important part of education, and I’m constantly encouraged by what I see is the increased awareness of those challenges in schools. I was in Manchester [earlier in the year] and saw presentations from four different secondary schools from across Yorkshire and Manchester. Those pupils had a good understanding of the importance of development issues to their lives.

Editor: Did they have any understanding of the fact that we’re going to have to live differently? And not consume [ie. buy so much stuff all the time]?

Well, they were all talking about the issue of fair-trade and ethically-produced goods. In terms of changes that they were planning to make themselves, that was a very practical example of where they were making different choices as a result of the information that had come to them.

Editor: Do you think that will be enough [for people to do], as individuals?

Well, I think ethical consumption has a role to play, but political choice has a role to play as well. It’s not by chance or by coincidence that DfID has the fastest rising budget line across Whitehall. It’s because people like myself and thousands of other people are conscious and determined that we are going to make this a priority, so whether it’s political action on international trade rules, whether it’s political action on debt production, whether it’s political action on raising the aid budget year on year, of course politics has a role to play; of course individual consumption has a role to play; and of course faith-based organisations, trade unions and other organisations have a role to play as well.

Lily: We recently celebrated the William Wilberforce anniversary (the abolition of the slave trade). But at the moment human trafficking is bigger that it ever was in Victorian or Georgian times. What is the department doing to take action against that?

Well, in terms of trafficking we deal with both the push factors and the pull factors. Very often trafficking happens in circumstances where there is poverty, inequality and a lack of opportunity in the host countries. That’s why it’s quite important action is taken there. Equally, effective action taken to stop trafficking in terms of effective law enforcement in those countries to which often young women are trafficked, and young children as well, [is important].That’s why we have been working across borders at European level to try and tackle the issue of trafficking. But we need to recognize that there are both, as I say, push and pull factors at work.

Lily: Do you think people are aware of this [human trafficking] now?

I certainly think there are new records being made to raise awareness of these issues by the Government. Harriet Harman, my colleague, has recently spoken very forcibly about the adverts appearing in local newspapers, and making a connection between prostitution in the United Kingdom and the evil of trafficking across borders. I think it’s important that people take that opportunity to make those connections and to speak up effectively against the evil that is human trafficking.

Nadia: The UK is committed to giving 0.7 per cent of its gross national income in aid and development. Why, when we’re such a rich country, are we giving so little?

Well, the expectation that a country like Britain gives 0.7 per cent GNI has been around since the very beginning of the 1970s. This government is the first government in British history to ever commit to meeting 0.7 per cent GNI by an agreed date, and the date that we’ve said that we will reach 0.7 per cent GNI is 2013. That reflects a determination on the part of this government to raise the aid budget every year, and we’ve just again managed to see year-on-year rises over the next three financial years as we make progress towards 2013. The money that we’ve raised to spend on international aid, the general money raised by taxation, is also used to pay for pensions for doctors, for teachers for a range of others services that people in the United Kingdom want, and that is why it’s important that as well as making progress towards the 2013 target we continue to provide economic stability and growth that lets us generate the income that allows us to make provision — not just for our aid budget, but also for the other budgets that people expect from government.

Lily: How much work that you’re doing at the moment is already being affected by climate change?

I think all the progress that we are making — whether on tackling poverty through education or health, or tackling poverty through economic development — is threatened if we don’t also recognise the importance of tackling climate change. Back in 2005 I campaigned to Make Poverty History. Unless we tackle climate change, it risks making poverty in the future of billions of our fellow citizens, so it’s a very, very real challenge for development.

Lily: What will be your methods of trying to eliminate poverty while taking into account climate change?

Well, there’s a number of things we need to do. Firstly, we need to get a global agreement on the cap on carbon emissions, and establish a trading system underneath that cap that allows developing countries to continue to grow in a way that recognises the challenge of poverty that they continue to face. It means that, in terms of the programmes we undertake ourselves; we need to assist countries in better understanding the effects of climate change on their economies and their societies. [Not long ago] I announced a ten-fold increase in DfID’s funding for research on climate change to assist with that task. It means we need to look at how we deliver our aid to ensure that our own development programmes reflect the need for countries to develop in a low carbon, rather than a high carbon way. And it means we need to look at our humanitarian programmes. In December, I visited Bangladesh, and saw the effects of Cyclone Sidr on the regions of southern Bangladesh. We have to anticipate that dangerous climate change will bring more of such events, and we need to, therefore, be ready in terms of [the] humanitarian support that we can offer people.

Nadia: Are ethical consuming and fair trade viable? Are these always going to be small niche markets? How important do you think they are [in terms of making a real difference to poor countries]?

Well, I’m a lone marcher on fairtrade coffee. I remember when fairtrade coffee didn’t taste like coffee at all. In that sense, there’s been huge progress in recent years, both in the range and quality of fairtrade products, and I welcome and celebrate that. One of the measures of success is that in mainstream outlets like the Co-op, and like Marks and Spencers, you can now get those products on the shelves. I think that’s to be encouraged, because it will introduce fairtrade and ethically-produced products to a wider range of consumers. But, as well as ensuring that we grow the market for fairtrade and ethically-produced products, we also need to ensure that the global trade rules are much fairer to the needs of developing countries.

Editor: How can young people, concerned about justice issues get involved in the work of DfID?

There’s a range of different ways that people to get involved. We’ve got a global schools’ partnership — which means that individual schools can partner with schools in developing countries — there’s information on our website. We have also introduced new opportunities for people to volunteer and to work in developing countries [called Platform 2].

Editor: How old do you have to be?

We’ve looking at what can be done with people at various stages, whether young or old, because the skills are varied that people need. Also, people should take the opportunity to learn from the DfID website. And I’m very struck that my own involvement with development didn’t start with a government department, it started with groups and organisations related to the church, and groups like Christian Aid and Oxfam. I think there are lots of opportunities for people to get engaged in non-governmental organisations, but also to be aware of the work that we’re doing on behalf of all the British people here in DfID.

All: Ok, thanks very much!

Would YOU like to be a Caris reporter? Click here to find out how.

 

 

*Internet Centre for Corruption Research, and Economics from the Transparency International (TI) 2007 Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) report