It’s rare that political decision-makers meet to discuss the meaning of a single word. But from 18th-19th February, leading politicians from the world’s richest countries will sit down in Paris to discuss the meaning of a term that is already politically charged: aid.
Why does this matter?
There’s a strong risk that these conversations will lead to secret funding cuts for life-saving projects around the world.
Most people would assume that aid is spent on fighting poverty in developing countries. However, rich countries are increasingly reinterpreting existing rules to silently slash the amount of aid used to lift people out of poverty in other countries.
In 2014, it’s estimated that €7.1 billion of European aid was spent within Europe - it never even reached a developing country. This figure could have provided life-saving vaccinations to 300 million children, preventing 5 million deaths in a single year.
Now, the world’s poorest are even more at risk of losing out on vital aid. In the last year, more than 1 million refugees have arrived on European shores. Fleeing inconceivable war, terror and persecution, refugees deserve help and protection. But more and more European governments are making the world’s poorest pay for this crisis, taking money away from poverty-fighting projects to fill the gap.
The proportion of aid spent in the least economically developed countries has reached a ten-year low, according to data from the OECD. When governments signed the 17 Global Goals last year, they committed to ending extreme poverty and reducing inequality. So why is less money being spent in the poorest parts of the world? Secretly diverting aid from issues that affect the world’s poorest not only undermines the promises made in 2015, it threatens individual lives.
Jonathan Glennie (policy and research director at Save the Children UK), pointed to the chaos caused by ebola as a warning of what happens when countries drop the ball on poor, but seemingly stable countries. Weak health infrastructure in Liberia, Guinea and Sierra Leone meant the disease could not be contained quickly enough to avoid an epidemic. As a result, the virus claimed over 11,000 lives.
Governments can’t afford to lose sight of the long term factors that will lift people out of poverty, whether that’s through universal healthcare, food security, or education. The knock-on effect of these issues is critical. When children are denied nutritious food, they not only face serious health risks like stunting and malnutrition, they also struggle to concentrate in school and achieve their potential. When girls are denied education, they are less able to challenge oppressive and extremist views. What if Malala Yousafzai had never gone to school? In her own words, “I would have two or three children by now.”
Vulnerable people across the world deserve the opportunity to create a stable and prosperous future.
By silently slashing aid and neglecting programmes that tackle poverty at its roots, governments risk causing more harm than good. Decision-makers need to ensure that aid is solely dedicated to assisting developing nations to do things like eradicate poverty, and preventing or responding to emergencies in developing countries, not spent in rich countries.
So a global outcry against these secret cuts is building. More than 45,000 people have already signed a joint petition reminding world leaders of their promise to protect the poorest. There’s still time to raise your voice and make sure that while they meet behind closed doors, politicians know the world is watching them.