International Development: The next leader has to get it

By Tim Nicholls / @tim_nicholls

International development was a priority under the Labour government. This is no real surprise. Overseas aid has been a keystone of Labour Party values for decades, because we strive for social justice both at home and abroad. Upon taking office in 1997, the Department for International Development was set up to reflect the separate identity of development from foreign and military affairs. Some great politicians have occupied the top job in DfID, which is testimony to the esteem that development is held in within the party.

But this is all now under threat. Compassionate conservativism is a lie. Rumours of the international development budget being spent across other departments, a misplaced ramping up of criticisms over aid efficiency, and finally a leaked DfID memo which outlines 100 projects that could face the axe. These were not marginal policies. These weren’t to make life better for those who already have it pretty good. These projects were for schools, for healthcare, for ethical trade.

The next Labour Party leader, whoever it may be, needs to come out of the gate fighting cuts in the international development budget. That’s why the Labour Campaign for International Development has gone to each of the candidates to ask them what they believe. The videos are enlightening and promising.

There is significant support for the Robin Hood Tax, which can do so much good at home and abroad. David Miliband says:

“Capital has gone international; taxation has to go international too. And that is the very strong case for the so-called ‘Robin Hood Tax'”

On climate change, one of the most pressing threats to the developing world, Ed Miliband reflects on his trip to Bangladesh before the Copenhagen summit:

“We need to complete the unfinished business of Copenhagen and strive with all our might on climate change… when we think about the next generation, they will be asking in 10 or 15 years time, ‘were you the last generation to fail to get the issue of climate change’.”

Andy Burnham spoke of the moral imperative of not rolling back on our responsibilities to those fleeing torture:

“We play a leadership role in helping develop living standards in other countries, but we also play our part in helping people fleeing persecution.”

Ed Balls talks about the central role of international development to the party:

“As a Labour Party and a union movement, we have always been internationalist in our outlook… we’ve always seen the opportunities and obligations for our country in an open world.”

Diane Abbott recognises the central role of trade to development:

“I think trade, not aid, is the key to giving justice and decent living standards to people in the third world. I think we have to understand what went wrong with Doha, that people just felt it was just opening the door for western multinationals to their countries and it wasn’t an equal negotiation. But I think we have to remember that if Africa, much of Asia and Latin America were to increase their trade by just 1% that would take 128 million people out of poverty.”

The UK no longer has a government that understands the importance of international development. It is vital that the Labour Party does.