 |
| pn91 |
Sam
Sachdeva is Newsroom's political editor, covering foreign affairs,
trade, defence, and security issues.
https://www.newsroom.co.nz/2018/09/16/237567/rethinking-how-nz-spends-its-overseas-aid
The
news in May of a
nearly billion-dollar boost boost to New Zealand’s foreign affairs
budget resulted
in a predictably polarised response along political lines.
The
Government, led by Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters, hailed
the decision as an essential increase after years of neglect, while
the National opposition accused it of “putting diplomats ahead of
doctors”.
The
largest piece of the package was $714.2 million over four years to
increase New Zealand’s official development assistance (ODA)
budget, money which would lift out spending as a proportion of gross
national income (GNI) from 0.23 percent to 0.28 percent.
It
transpired the decision came despite
Treasury officials recommending an “informed assessment” of
where and how any extra assistance should be spent before the cash
was handed over.
It was
a nice idea, Peters said, “but the reality is these things can’t
wait: we were losing our character, our footprint, we weren’t
playing our full game, we weren’t pulling our weight so to speak”.
As
it turns out, while Peters got his aid, a review of New Zealand’s
aid and development policy is still taking place, with
the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade accepting submissions until
the end of the month.
Any
changes will be the first made since 2009, the first year of the last
National government.
NGOs,
academics and Peters himself agree a reassessment is well overdue -
but what do they think needs to change?
The
bulk of the new aid seems set to go to the Pacific, following Peters’
“Pacific
reset”
and
a pledge to increase both diplomatic efforts and aid to the region.
Terence
Wood, a research fellow at the Australian National University’s
Development Policy Centre who previously worked on New Zealand’s
aid programme, says it’s worth distinguishing how New Zealand has
historically given aid in the Pacific from its work in the rest of
the world.
While
he credits the current Government for its Pacific reset and desire to
refresh its work there, Wood says many of its predecessors have
focused on the region and given aid in a positive way.
Elsewhere,
he believes the last government began to use aid as a way to benefit
New Zealand’s own interests (such as its successful bid for a seat
on the UN Security Council).
Aid
decisions should be made more altruistically, he says, and there are
already signs that could be the case under this Government.
“We
need to make sure we refocus our aid so it’s all about helping
other countries, not helping ourselves.”
One of Wood's concerns is that New Zealand finds itself in a foreign aid “bidding war” - similar to what took place during the Cold War - which results in the quality of aid projects and provision deteriorating.
There
is good reason to question just how altruistic the Pacific reset is,
however.
China’s
growing presence and influence in the region,highlighted in the
Government’s defence policy statement, seems a clear influence,
with Peters warning of “an increasingly contested strategic space,
no longer neglected by Great Power ambition”.
Wood
says it’s hard to assess the significance of China’s rising role
in the Government’s decisions, with different messages coming from
different ministers and departments.
“Your
guess is as good as mine, although it would be logical New Zealand is
paying at least some attention to China’s role in the Pacific.”
One of
his concerns is that New Zealand finds itself in a foreign aid
“bidding war” - similar to what took place during the Cold War -
which results in the quality of aid projects and provision
deteriorating.
A
chance for genuine partnership
Council
for International Development director Josie Pagani, whose
organisation serves as an “umbrella agency” for international
development organisations in New Zealand, sees the Pacific reset as a
chance for the country to lead the world in how it does development.
“If
you look at the language around the reset, it’s about moving away
from the traditional aid relationship where you’ve got
beneficiaries and donors to something where you’re looking at
what’s the mutual benefit, and what’s our shared destiny - we’re
all in the Pacific.”
Rather
than “doing development to others”, Pagani says, we should be
working with local community groups in the countries as a genuine
partnership, pointing to the way New Zealand responds to cyclones and
other natural disasters as an example where things could change.
“If we can built in resilience and skills and capacity for local people to respond in the Pacific themselves, rather than us flying in like Superman and Superwoman to do it for them, that’s a really positive thing.”
“What
you would be spending your aid budget on is things like building the
resilience of local communities, not only to respond to a cyclone
themselves but even to the extent of thinking, if we’re sending
over shelter kits and wash kits...and tarpaulins and so on, why
aren’t those things being produced even in the Pacific so you’re
supporting local businesses?
“If
we can built in resilience and skills and capacity for local people
to respond in the Pacific themselves, rather than us flying in like
Superman and Superwoman to do it for them, that’s a really positive
thing.”
Another
area of contention has been the last government’s decision, led by
Murray McCully, to focus on economic development projects.
Former
foreign affairs minister Murray McCully's emphasis on aid projects
which benefited economic development has been criticised in the
sector. Photo: Lynn Grieveson.
Unicef
NZ’s executive director Vivien Maidaborn says her concern is not
that economic development projects aren’t valuable, but that they
do not represent a complete strategy.
“For
example, if 30 percent of the children in your country have stunted
development, physical and mental development as a result of not good
water sources, poor nutrition, poor sanitation, then it doesn’t
matter how much you invest in economic development, it’s never
going to be integrated into the whole population.”
Pagani
agrees, and says signs of a shift under the new Government are “music
to the ears of the NGO sector”.
“Of
course economic development is important and the Pacific deserves to
have the benefits of economic development like New Zealand, but you
can’t for example just build a runway and hope the tourists will
come if you haven’t also spent the money to ensure those local
communities are skilled to service those tourists.”
Everything
on the table - Peters
There
are other areas where some want change: Maidaborn believes we should
increase the amount of aid and assistance we deliver in South East
Asia, a region of great relevance to us with important trading
partners and shared interests.
That
would help to address concerns about a flood of aid coming into the
Pacific without the capability for local agencies on the ground to
use it well, she says.
Maidaborn
also believes the historical focus on poverty reduction should be
tweaked slightly to inequality, with some traditional aid recipients
close to becoming middle-income countries but the income data hiding
those who are still suffering.
Pagani
says there needs to be much better collaboration on aid and
development, with a seat at the table for businesses, NGOs, the
Pacific diaspora and others along with government officials and
politicians.
For his part, Peters seems open to all suggestions, saying: “Every precept should be reviewed as to whether it’s working or not and we’ll wait and see what the consultation process delivers.”
She’s
also concerned about a separate review of how MFAT funds NGOs to
deliver aid, warning against any “unintended consequences” which
incentivises organisations to compete against each other.
As
Wood points out, the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals - which New
Zealand has signed up to, and MFAT says will be part of the aid
review - aid another layer of complexity to be addressed.
For
his part, Peters seems open to all suggestions, saying: “Every
precept should be reviewed as to whether it’s working or not and
we’ll wait and see what the consultation process delivers.”
MFAT
says Cabinet will consider a “refreshed” policy before the end of
the year: it seems unlikely to make huge headlines, but could make a
significant change to how and why we deliver aid around the world.
This
article was first published on Newsroom
Pro on
Friday, September 14 at 5.50 pm.
No comments:
Post a Comment