Skip to main content

Bilateral Aid

Volume 597: debated on Thursday 25 February 1999

The text on this page has been created from Hansard archive content, it may contain typographical errors.

asked Her Majesty's Government:What of the cash plans allocations for 1998–99 have been allocated to (a) governmental bodies in developing countries and (b) to non-governmental organisations. [HL1121]

We do not set budgets by the institution used to channel development assistance; we are increasingly focusing our efforts on outputs. Retrospective analyses of bilateral expenditure through UK non-governmental organisations are published annually in Statistics on International Development, which is available in the Library of this House.

asked Her Majesty's Government:Whether they will list recipient projects and the funds allocated to them by the United Kingdom bilateral aid budget towards sound policies and pro-poor economic growth in 1998–99 in Uganda. [HLI124]

All projects under the bilateral aid budget in Uganda are designed to promote sound policies and/or pro-poor economic growth. In November of last year a list of all active projects in Uganda (and India) was deposited in the Libraries of both Houses, in response to a question in another place from the honourable Member for South West Devon to my right honourable Friend the Secretary of State for International Development. The list details the name of each project and the funds committed to each for the entire life of the project.

asked Her Majesty's Government:Which projects received what funds from the United Kingdom aid budget towards good governance in (a) 1997–98 and (b) 1998–99. [HL1137]

Information on policy targeting is available from DFIDs Policy Information System (PIMS) for bilateral projects with a commitment value of £100, 000 or more. PIMS covers around 70 per cent. of bilateral expenditure only. On 1 April 1998, the definition of good government changed to exclude human rights, which are now covered separately in an extended definition which includes economic and social rights as well as civil and political rights. For comparison purposes, the attached listing therefore includes all projects which targeted good government as a principal policy objective in 1997–98 and those which targeted either good governance or human rights as a principal policy objective in 1998–99 to date.

Projects marked Principal for Human Rights: 1998–99
CountryProject/Programme TitleCommitment
Asia RegionalPaticipatory Action Research with Migrant Children and Youth245, 000
BangladeshCommunity Development II350, 000
ChinaChina: Shanghai Foster Care and Training Project621, 016
ColombiaCivil Conflict (New PHS)149, 905
GhanaWSIP Water Sector Improvement Sector4, 065, 000
HPD Individual ContractsUK Financial Contribution to the Population Council200, 000
IndiaSupport to ILO for the Elimination of Child Poverty2, 500, 000
IndonesiaComplimentary Feeding Programme1, 250, 000
MozambiqueNational Child Rights Programme128, 350
RwandaICRC Detainee Protection Activities in Rwanda350, 000
South Africa, Republic ofSupport to the South African San Institute (SASI) and the SA535, 500
UgandaDisabled People121, 450
ZambiaZambia Primary Reading Programme10, 205, 000

asked Her Majesty's Government:In view of the commitment to eradicate poverty, how they explain that the share of the Department for International Development's bilateral aid (excluding emergency aid) to low income countries has declined by 3.6 per cent. between 1996–97 and 1997–98. [HL1141]

For 1997–98, DfID was bound by the financial ceilings fixed by the previous administration. DfID inherited a programme which declined in cash terms in 1997–98 over the previous year. During 1997–98, DfID reviewed and refocused all programmes to ensure they met our new objectives. The Comprehensive Spending Review announced in July 1998 set out the Government's spending plans for 1999–00 to 2001–02 and reversed the decline in development spending.Within this context, the fall in the proportion of aid going to low income countries in 1997–98 was due to two specific factors:increased expenditure in South Africa and Montserrat. Both are classified as upper-middle income countries, but DfID programmes address important needs and focus on the poorer elements of those communities.a relatively small decrease in the value of aid going to low income countries.

asked Her Majesty's Government:Which projects received what funds from the United Kingdom bilateral aid budget towards providing clean and safe water to poor people in (a) 1997–98 and (b) 1998–99. [HL1140]

In 1997–98 the total Department for International Development (DfID) expenditure on water-related projects was £49.9 million. Of this, £30.3 million went to support rural and urban water supply and sanitation initiatives; an eight per cent. increase over 1996–97. Figures for 1998–99 are not yet available, although, based on projects recently approved for funding, we are expecting an increase.In all, approximately 150 projects received DfID funding in 1997–98. In terms of financial value, the allocation was 56 per cent. in Africa (notably Ghana, Zimbabwe, South Africa, Ethiopia, Kenya, Lesotho, Malawi, Nigeria, Swaziland); 34 per cent. in South Asia (India. Nepal, Bangladesh, Pakistan) and the remaining 10 per cent. allocated between South America, Middle East and Eastern Europe. Some 7 per cent. of the funds were used to support the implementation of projects through civil society organisations.