UK

Britain’s Olympic hope Mo Farah joins ONE to sow the seeds of change

Apr 10th, 2012 12:45 PM UTC
By Katie Martin

British athlete Mo Farah and his family are some of the many people across the world sowing a seed to mark the launch today of Thrive, ONE’s ambitious new campaign that calls on each of us to play our part to break the cycle of hunger and poverty by tackling their root causes.

We’ve published new analysis today which finds that 50 million people could be locked in extreme poverty and 15 million children could remain chronically malnourished unless world leaders take urgent action to break the cycle of poverty and hunger.

More than a billion people – 1 in 5 of the world’s population – live on less than $1.25 a day. This year, 178 million young children, more than 10 times the number of children in the UK, will be stunted due to malnutrition. Their brains and bodies will never recover.

Mo, who last year set up the Mo Farah Foundation to help people suffering from the food crisis in his homeland of Somalia, said:

“It is a tragedy that so many millions of people across the world do not have enough food to eat. In places like Somalia, where I was born, many people are facing a desperate situation following severe droughts. As well as providing immediate help for those struggling to survive, the international community should invest in long-term solutions like water wells, crop storage, and support for farmers.

I am pleased to be working with ONE to remind world leaders that famine and hunger in the 21st century is an obscenity.”

We are calling on world leaders to focus on 30 of the poorest countries that already have smart agriculture and nutrition plans that are tested and affordable. Investing in these plans will help smallholder farmers produce more food, generate bigger incomes and pull themselves out of poverty. They will also give children a better chance to survive and thrive. Focussing on these 30 plans will pave the way for similar progress in other countries.

However, our analysis highlights a significant funding gap, as just 50% of the total funds required to implement the agriculture investment plans has been identified. This leaves a gap of around $27 billion that needs to be filled between now and 2015.

Adrian Lovett, Europe Executive Director of ONE, said:

“Real and sustained investment in small-scale farming, together with a focus on ensuring children have enough nourishing food to eat, will have a huge impact on the lives of millions of people. This campaign is the beginning of a determined fight to help them to pull themselves out of poverty and get them on a path to prosperity.

2012 presents a fantastic opportunity to address these problems, and kick-start a final push towards the Millennium Development Goals deadline in 2015. We have one thousand days left before 2015.  Let’s make every single one count.

This isn’t just another campaign. It’s time for a new ambition, a new optimism, a new determination. We don’t want people simply to survive. We want them to thrive.”

Specifically, we’re calling on governments to agree a new compact on food security and nutrition in 2012, which should include:

• A new initiative at G8 level to build on the L’Aquila Food Security Initiative that is results-driven, and that includes clear goals to lift 50 million people out of poverty and save 15 million children from stunting through investment in country-owned plans in 30 low-income countries;
• A renewal of the commitment made by African governments in 2003 to invest 10% of their national budgets in agriculture and rural development, while setting out new and improved goals with greater transparency and accountability;
• A new push to galvanise private sector investment in agriculture; and
• Measures to tackle volatility in global food markets, which have a disproportionate impact on the world’s poorest people.

Sign our petition here to help us put pressure on world leaders to take the urgent action that’s needed to lift people out of poverty and hunger.

Time for a new G8 Hunger Commitment?

Mar 27th, 2012 12:32 PM UTC
By ONE Partners

The following is a guest blog from Natasha Adams, Campaigns and Parliamentary Officer at Concern Worldwide

I find it really hard to imagine how awful it must be to go without enough to eat, let alone the horror of being unable to feed my family. Most of us in the UK are lucky – although the price of food is creeping up we rarely miss meals and have access to enough of the food we like to keep us healthy. We may moan we’re ‘starving’ if we have to skip lunch, but we don’t stop to think about what this really means.

One in seven people don’t have enough to eat – in a world where enough food is produced for all. Another one in seven don’t have enough nutritious food to keep them healthy.

The recent ONE campaign research ‘Small Change: Big Difference’, highlights how important UK aid is, and what a huge difference it is making to the world’s poorest people. We should feel proud that our Government is committed to keeping its promise on aid spending, but as a leader in international development the UK can do more to encourage other countries to make a difference too.

This year the US will host the G8 summit in May, with a focus on food security, agriculture and nutrition, as the last G8 Hunger Promise comes to an end. After this year’s summit in the US, G8 leaders will meet here in the UK in 2013. This means the UK Government is in a great position to push for all G8 leaders to make a new and improved commitment to reduce world hunger, and the UK can continue to lead the way when we host the summit next year.

You can help

Prime Minister David Cameron will represent the UK at the G8 summit, and he can push for a new hunger commitment. We think the best way of getting him to hear our voices on this is to ask supporters to email their MPs, asking that MPs write to the Prime Minister. If enough MPs write, quoting emails from constituents, this will give a clear message that the UK public care about hunger.

Concern would like the new hunger commitment to be developed in partnership with poorer countries, so they can say how best money can be spent to ensure the poorest people have access to nutritious food. It makes sense to focus on sustainability as well, and this will mean support to the poorest farmers to help them grow more. Finally, we would like the new commitment to be measured not on funds committed but against impact on hunger, so we can be sure it is working.

Please help by emailing your MP today – our template email means this will only take 2 minutes, and you can edit it yourself.

Craig David on the fight against tuberculosis

Mar 23rd, 2012 5:37 PM UTC
By ONE Partners

Tomorrow (March 24th) is World TB (tuberculosis) Day – the following is a guest post from the Stop TB partnership about British R&B star Craig David’s recent trip to South Africa where he met children affected by TB.

In 2010 8.8 million people became ill with TB and 1.4 million people died from the disease.

People with TB often suffer from discrimination and stigma, rejection and social isolation. And the disease is a major cause of poverty because people with TB are often too sick to work, and they and their families may have to pay for treatment.

Since 1995, 46 million people have been successfully treated and up to 6.8 million lives saved through DOTS, a rigorous approach to treatment endorsed by the World Health Organization.

R&B star Craig David is a goodwill ambassador against tuberculosis and in a recent trip to South Africa spoke to children about the effects of tuberculosis on young people, particularly the stigma they may face among their peers.

Craig David explains his motivations for joining the fight against tuberculosis and talks about the moving experiences he had in South Africa, from meeting schoolchildren by day to jamming with local musicians by night. He explains that he wants to “give something back” by raising awareness of tuberculosis. Craig tells the story of a young South African girl—she openly spoke up about her own struggle with the disease showing courage, frankness, and a very positive attitude—and shares his hope that the power of music—which “has a place in everybody’s life”—will reach millions of people and have a positive impact on the fight against tuberculosis.

You can find out more about World TB day, and the fight against the disease on the Stop TB partnership website. www.stoptb.org

UK on track to keep its promise to the world’s poor

Mar 21st, 2012 5:34 PM UTC
By Claire Hazelgrove

Today’s UK Budget was an important moment in the fight against extreme poverty. Millions of young lives and family futures depended on Chancellor George Osborne sticking to his promise not to balance the books on the backs of the world’s poorest people. And I’m very happy to say that today, he has.

In the last two weeks, more than 140 ONE members here in the UK have sent letters to the Chancellor, asking him to keep his promise and spend just 0.7% of national income on international aid from 2013 onwards.

Our new report – Small Change, Big Difference – highlights the great results that UK aid will achieve for the world’s poorest people, including putting 15.9 million children in school over the next four years. But for that to happen, there are two key moments the UK Government must deliver on.

The first of those was today, when George Osborne set out the UK’s spending plans for the next financial year. Had the current aid spending of 0.56% of national income been cut back, hitting 0.7% in 2013 would be much harder to reach, leading to fewer babies born safely, fewer people able to access life-saving treatment for HIV, and fewer people protected from malaria.

The next pivotal moment is 12 months away. In the Budget next year the Chancellor will need to confirm the UK will hit the 0.7% target. Any delay would mean the Department for International Development wouldn’t be able to help 17 million people access clean and safe drinking water, or provide 80 million children with vaccines against preventable diseases – saving around 1.4 million lives.

Today, we can be proud of the UK Government for not walking away from those living on just a dollar a day. And now it’s over to us. The Government need to see and hear from ONE members that this is popular, affordable, and makes an incredible difference.

We’ll be in touch to let you know how you can be a part of this journey. But something that you can do right now is download our new report, take a look at the great results that UK aid could achieve, and let your friends, family and colleagues know just how many lives will be touched – if we stay on track.

Thank you to everyone who wrote a letter to the Chancellor. Each of your voices helped show that Britain cares. The UK can be the first G8 country to fulfill its aid promise, and with you as ambassadors, we have a great chance of doing so.

Join in the discussion about our new report using the #bigdifference hashtag on Twitter

UK tax statements show the reality of aid spending

Mar 20th, 2012 12:11 PM UTC
By Joseph Powell

In tomorrow’s budget Chancellor George Osborne is expected to announce that every UK taxpayer will receive an annual statement of what their taxes are spent on. For those of us working on the UK aid budget this is welcome news – when asked people tend to vastly overestimate what the UK spends on overseas aid. However, model tax statements published by The Sun and Daily Mail make clear that for people of all income levels less than 1% of their taxes are spent on aid.

The impact this 1% contribution makes is explained in our report ‘Small Change: Big Difference’ published yesterday. It includes the remarkable fact that UK aid spending will put 15.9 million children in school over the next four years, and ensure 5.8 million mothers can give birth in a safe environment.

The misconceptions about how much the UK invests in overseas aid were highlighted in a short video we made last year:

Cutting aid means fewer vaccines, more mothers giving birth in appalling conditions and risking progress in conflict-affected states

Mar 19th, 2012 5:28 PM UTC
By ONE Partners

This is a guest blog from Louise Mensch who is MP for Corby and East Northamptonshire.  Follow Louise on Twitter. This post originally appeared on Conservative Home

On Wednesday George Osborne will stand up in parliament and deliver his budget. Assuming he hasn’t had a change of heart and decided to row back on promises set out in the Conservative manifesto and the Coalition Agreement, the detail in the Red Book will confirm that the UK will meet its promise to spend 0.7% of our national income on aid from next year.

Is this the right thing to do? Aid has been much in the news lately since a YouGov poll for the Sunday Times showed that 66% of Britons thought we were spending too much on aid.  I welcome this debate. All government spending should be scrutinised, because every penny of taxpayers’ money should be spent well. But I strongly believe that our aid money is being well spent and the decision to stick to the promised spending plan is the right one.

Sometimes politicians should follow the public, and listen to the polling. But too much “government by focus group” was the hallmark of where the last Labour government failed. Always going for what was popular in that minute, Labour ducked all the hard choices, and wound up with not only the colossal deficit that is their legacy to the nation, but too few positive achievements in the plus column. What people truly want from Prime Ministers, and Chancellors too, is leadership and ideology. “Ideology” has become a dirty word, but it shouldn’t be. You need to stand for something. You need to have a clear vision, run for election on that vision, and pursue it in government. This is more important than whether an individual policy polls well or poorly.

What defined David Cameron, and George Osborne alongside him, in opposition, was that they were new types of Conservatives. Essentially, that they married fiscal conservatism with social liberalism. There is the tension with the right; and there is the sum total of Cameronism. It can be found in IDS’s welfare reforms, which so beautifully marry proper responsible finances with visionary social justice. Iain’s work in the Centre for Social Justice, in opposition, changed both him and the entire Conservative movement. The Universal Credit is the biggest idea to come out of British politics for decades. It will change lives and the country. It is to George Osborne’s eternal credit that he could think long-term enough to absorb the upfront costs of reform. And the welfare debate, including the benefits cap at £26k, is one our party should relish.Our party has always been the party of sound finances. To this, Cameron, Osborne and the team below them have added two vital words – social justice. We stand for social justice. That includes sustainable help to the poorest people in the world, help that we owe as a great nation. The poorest people in Britain are infinitely better off than the poorest in the developing world. 0.7% is never going to break the bank. It is responsible, sustainable, and socially just. When I listen to people online complaining about just 0.7% in aid, all I hear is “Am I my brother’s keeper?” It wasn’t an attractive slogan first time around.

New analysis published today by ONE, shows just what an impact our aid will have on the poorest people in the world between now and 2015. Amazingly our decisions mean that 80 million children will be vaccinated over the next four years, saving 1.4 million lives. That’s 1.4 million mothers who won’t have to see their children die from a preventable disease, knowing that if she lived in a different village or earned just a bit more money from the produce she sold at market, her child could still be alive.

Our aid will make sure that nearly 10 million people are well fed so that children can grow up strong and healthy, able to learn and make a living so that in time they can support their own family. It will provide safe drinking water for 17 million people. It will save the lives of 50,000 mums and ensure 5.8 million births take place in a safe environment, so that mother and baby are not alone but supported by a health worker – giving them both the best possible start in life.

The list of results, of lives changed and transformed, goes on. Some commentators on this site and elsewhere have said the aid budget could be cut or frozen with no mention of the impact. Let’s be clear, cutting the aid budget means fewer vaccines for kids, more mothers giving birth in appalling conditions and the risk of recently conflict affected states going backwards. Of course there needs to be transparency and accountability over the money we spend, but compare these results to what other government departments do. Even at a rate of 0.7% of national income aid amounts to just 1.6 pence in every pound of government spending. Few other items of government spending achieve so much, for relatively small sums.

None of this means we shouldn’t find messages within polling that can shape not if we give – that is our commitment to social justice, what the modern Conservative party stands for – but how we give. 69% said we should wind down our aid to India. Repeated trade snubs and the fact that that nation has just signed an energy and space pact with Vladimir Putin certainly mean that India ought not to be a prime target for our aid. In opposition, it was reported that much Tory thinking focused on a book by Paul Collier called “The Bottom Billion”, which certainly shaped my view on aid. Its essential premise is that the traditional “aid recipients” are countries that are no longer that poor, and that help is better targeted to those nations who definitively need it – the world’s poorest billion people. Think Burkina Faso, not India. In my view, greater government focus on the truly needy would see that original 66% who think we spend too much on aid reduce rapidly. People want value for money, including in development.

If we cut aid back now – the progress we have seen in recent years would stall. And we’d be seen across the world as a promise-breaker not a promise keeper. Our work in international development is something we should all take great pride in. The results are remarkable and UK is a standard bearer around the world for how international development should be done. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) reported in 2010 that “the UK is in many ways seen as a model by other donors.” We are constantly improving our aid programmes, investing the best live-saving programmes.

In 2015 this government will be able to look back and say we were honest. We didn’t balance the books on the backs of the poor. We stuck to our promise. And as a result we have transformed the lives of many millions of people around the world.

Read the full ONE report “Small Change: Big Difference” by visiting www.one.org/bigdifference

Small Change Big Difference

Mar 19th, 2012 9:26 AM UTC
By Joseph Powell

Today ONE has published new research that shows the impact UK aid spending will have on the lives of some of the poorest people in the world. The UK has committed to hit the UN target to spend 0.7% of national income on aid from 2013, something Chancellor George Osborne is expected to confirm when he delivers the annual budget on Wednesday.

Our report – “Small Change: Big Difference” – shows that by the government sticking to its commitments on aid, the UK will:

• Put 15.9 million children in school
• Provide over 80 million children with vaccines against life-threatening diseases, saving an estimated 1.4 million lives
• Help 44.9 million people participate in freer and fairer elections
• Support over 40 million people with prevention or treatment for malaria, including distributing 26.6 million bed nets
• Provide access to safe drinking water to over 17 million people
• Help 77.6 million people access formal financial services, such as bank accounts or credit, which are the basics needed to start a business
• Ensure 5.8 million births take place in a safe environment, saving the lives of over 50,000 mothers
• Provide 633,000 people with life-saving treatment for HIV
• Ensure better nutrition for 9.6 million people

It’s easy to get lost in such large numbers – but the overall picture is clear. Both through country offices of the Department for International Development and supporting effective multilateral organisations like the Global Fund for AIDS, TB and Malaria, the UK is having a transformational impact on the lives of millions of poor people.

ONE’s Europe Director Adrian Lovett said:

Britain’s aid costs less than a penny in each pound of national income, and this analysis reveals for the first time just how much every penny counts.  For many millions of poor people, what happens to our aid budget is a matter of life or death.

In tough economic times, keeping our aid promise is more important than ever. No other budget achieves so much for so little. The UK is proven to spend aid effectively. It is an investment now that will save and transform lives, boost Britain’s own economic prospects and bring forward the day when aid is no longer needed.

ONE praises Obama, Cameron on joint alliance against global poverty

Mar 13th, 2012 8:27 PM UTC
By Michael Elliott

As the UK Prime Minister David Cameron visits Washington, Michael Elliott, ONE’s President and CEO responds to today’s joint article by the Prime Minister and US President Barack Obama in the Washington Post. In the article they make clear that they “embrace their responsibility as leaders in the development that enables people to live in dignity, health and prosperity.”

ONE welcomes the support of the Prime Minister and President for investment in food security, their work to improve maternal health and reduce the preventable deaths of children, and their ‘renewed commitment’ to the Global Fund for AIDS, TB and Malaria and reaching the ‘beginning of the end of AIDS’. We also applaud their recognition of the importance of the Open Government Partnership, which will help to make governments all over the world more transparent and accountable.

Now that the L’Aquila framework has run its course, there is a momentous opportunity to use the G8 and G20 summits to secure a new global compact on agriculture and food security. But American and British leadership is required to make this a reality.

International support for developing countries’ own agricultural investment plans could help to lift millions of people out of poverty, in an approach that stresses country ownership, private sector participation, and smart development assistance. The UK and US agree on the importance of these guiding principles. Now we need to rally broad international support around them.

This new framework for agriculture must also emphasize the pivotal role of nutrition. If the right interventions are made, there is an opportunity to prevent millions of children from becoming stunted, and hence from suffering irreversible developmental damage. That will ensure that a generation of future leaders, fathers and mothers can reach their full potential and not be held back by preventable impediments.

These are practical and strategic goals that are appropriate for a bold, historic partnership to promote food security across the developing world. Now is the time to catalyze action to reduce hunger and malnutrition, using the platforms provided by the G8 at Camp David, the G20 at Los Cabos, and continuing the good work into the UK’s crucial presidency of the G8 in 2013.

Photo credit: Wikimedia Commons

An urgent message to George Osborne

Mar 7th, 2012 11:30 AM UTC
By Claire Hazelgrove

Will you help us get an urgent message to the Chancellor, George Osborne, ahead of the UK Budget on 21st March?

This Budget is important in many ways, not just for those of us living here in the UK, but also for the world’s poorest, as the Chancellor sets out the Government’s spending plans for international development over the next year.

Please join me in writing a personalised letter to George Osborne, asking him to uphold the UK’s proud history of supporting those most in need, by keeping our promise on international aid.

Visit our letter action page to see what you could include in your letter, and please help us send a message to George Osborne that this would be the worst time to turn our backs on some of the poorest, already struggling to get by on a dollar a day.

This is a crucial moment in making sure the UK Government is still on track to spend just 0.7% of national income on international aid by 2013 – just a penny in every pound. You and I know this saves lives, and gives families a chance.

Let’s send a message to George Osborne ahead of the Budget, to make sure we can still be proud of the UK for leading the fight against extreme poverty on 21st March. Just click here to get all the information you need to write your letter.

Thank you for your support.

The Financial Times and Economist back transparency laws

Feb 27th, 2012 3:20 PM UTC
By Joseph Powell

Leading business publications the Financial Times and The Economist have recently voiced their support for transparency laws on both sides of the Atlantic that will help reduce corruption in developing countries and increase the resources spent on poverty reduction. They join the voices of 180,000 ONE members who have called for policy-makers to stand firm against lobbying by a small group of oil and mining companies who want to maintain the secrecy status quo (you can still sign our US and European petitions).

In its editorial today the Financial Times writes:

“In the past two years, the US Congress and the European Commission have acted boldly to clear up the murkiness in which natural resource companies’ payments to governments around the world are clouded. Lobbying efforts aimed at overturning this progress on both sides of the Atlantic should not be allowed to succeed.”

The Economist has taken a similar line. In a leader article on February 11^th it wrote:

“The mining firms… should support Western efforts to impose greater transparency on the industry. This will drive away at least some of the cowboys and make competition more open. Time to side with the sheriff.”

Both publications have highlighted how important it is that the proposed US and European Union laws are fit for purpose, and deliver information that genuinely empowers civil society in developing countries to hold their political leaders accountable for the revenue received. The Financial Times writes:

“Many extractive companies are happy to live with [public reporting], but the most recalcitrant demand changes. On both sides of the Atlantic the fight is on to reshape the reporting rules so that whatever is published is less informative. In particular, it is suggested that the laws’ call for reporting project-by-project details be watered down with overbroad definitions of “project”. There is no justification for this: most payments to states are calculated on a project basis anyway, so publishing such detail is no great burden.”

They are correct that aggregating payments at a country level would not deliver the same benefits in terms of accountability. If only payments of over $1 million were disclosed – something that extractive companies are lobbying for – local communities would be excluded from accessing all the information relevant to projects in their vicinity.

The Economist also examined the claim that disclosure rules would be in contravention of domestic law in some countries, but find that:

“Businesspeople struggle to produce examples of how local restrictions on publishing confidential contract details could clash with transparency requirements elsewhere. Contracts in developing countries typically have a clause permitting disclosures that are required by the company’s home country and stock exchange. Nor does greater disclosure seem to hurt competitiveness. In 2011 Angola awarded several new deepwater oil concessions to firms covered by Dodd-Frank. No oil company has so far cited increased openness as a material risk in its SEC filings.”

This spike in attention on this issue from the world’s leading financial media shows the intense scrutiny on the US and EU law-making process. Watering down key details will undermine efforts to reduce corruption and end the ‘natural resource curse’. Both the Financial Times and The Economist – known for their business-friendly coverage – have looked at the evidence and concluded these laws are good for the long-term interests of companies and good for economic development in poor countries. That is a winning formula that policy-makers should now heed.