Interview with British MP Tony Baldry

Tony Baldry is a British MP who chairs his government’s powerful Select Committee on International Development. During a recent visit to Ethiopia to study its poverty-reduction strategy, he told IRIN that food aid alone was not the answer to the country's food security problems, adding that tourism and information technology should play a crucial role in its development plan. QUESTION: Is the commitment there to provide food aid to Ethiopia’s emergency, given huge shortages elsewhere on the continent? ANSWER: I don’t think there is a lack of commitment to ensure sufficient food aid comes through. I think my bigger concern is the longer term – how does one turn it around. Compared to 1985, the logistics of moving food aid is now substantially better. But the truth of the matter is that substantial amounts of food aid from the United States are surplus grain from Montana and elsewhere. It is great, it keeps people alive, but it undermines local markets, it gives little incentive to farmers to grow grain. In parallel to moving in the logistics of metric tonnes there has got to be a hell of a lot more effort between us as donors and the government of Ethiopia and other agencies in a longer-term strategy. Q: To tackle the long-term problems requires substantial funds. Why has Britain still not agreed to 0.7 percent of GDP for development? A: I am in a unique position in being an opposition MP on a select committee, so I have no brief for the government. But in fairness to Gordon Brown [Chancellor of the Exchequer], the UK is now the fourth-largest international donor in the world after the US, Japan and the EU. We are now ahead of France and Germany, and I think the recent increase in the Department for International Development, DFID, [the UK government’s aid arm] budget is probably the best increase they have ever had in percentage terms certainly. And as far as Ethiopia is concerned, we, apart from humanitarian aid, disengaged from Ethiopia during the days of the [former Marxist] Derg [government] and because of DFID policy - that I don’t always agree with - that there is very little point giving development aid to countries in conflict, so during the time of the war with Eritrea little money was being given. Q: Would you then have continued to support Ethiopia during its war with Eritrea? A: I think sometimes DFID is a bit ideological. Some conflicts are different to others. So if you take Sudan or Somalia, a country without a government or functioning at all, it seems a little different from the situation where you have a conflict involving one part of the country in one area. But I mean that’s all history, it's finished. We are substantially increasing our development aid budget to Ethiopia as evidenced by the fact DFID has three people in the country, and this time next year there will be 12. We are going to be giving budgetary support to education, health and road-building. I agree a lot of media attention is focusing on southern Africa, but Ethiopia is a huge country [and], in terms of population, a key player. I am not sure that is well enough understood in Europe. It is going to require a lot of funding to turn this around... You have got food insecurity, compounded by the collapse of the coffee price, compounded by the impact of HIV/AIDS. Q: Development in Ethiopia is agriculturally led. Does that seem realistic? A: If you have got a country where around 80 percent are living in rural areas you have got to start there. But I think one has also got to consider how you diversify from that. So in parts of the country I think there is considerable potential for greater revenue from tourism... The air network is pretty good; there probably is going to be need for investment in hotels in due course, but that will come. I also think a lot is going to need to be invested in information technology and communicating with the outside world. Q: A point the Ethiopian prime minister makes is trade not aid. Do you agree? A: It seems the general claims are fine, but what we need to discover is the specific policy problems. What actually can be done to help Malawi or Ethiopia or Ghana penetrate European markets? What are the problems, what are the inhibitors? And to what extent would improving European markets help them, and to what extent would improving regional markets help them? I just wonder whether in 20 years' time, one won’t still see substantial Ethiopian products going to Saudi Arabia, because it is near and approximate transport costs are cheaper than coming to Europe. It has got to be trade not aid. If we are going to meet the UN-agreed 2015 targets, we cannot just have a development policy that is dependent on how many metric tonnes we shift. Q: Do you think the Millennium Development Goals [MDGs] will be met? A: I think they have got to be seen as articles of faith. I think the MDGs will be met globally, not least because of China. Therefore, in Africa for the MDGs to be met it is going to require sustained pressure on everyone to achieve this... What we now need is a disciplined set of milestones about how they are going to be met. If we are going to meet them, helping African trade is crucially important. Q: DFID’s budget coming in to Ethiopia is around 10 million pounds sterling a year. Is that sufficient? A: I think it is going to go up substantially. But I fully accept that donors together are going to have to invest a hell of a lot in Ethiopia if it is going to come through. These next few years are going to be pretty crucial for Ethiopia. Q: Where do you see the balance between emergency and long-terms needs? A: There are going to be year-on-year immediate food needs which are going to have to be met. But I think one has got to have a longer-term strategy. If our US colleagues' response to immediate problems is always just simply shifting surplus grain across, it seems that inevitably has an impact on local markets. If you are a farmer and you know that you are going to get undercut grain there is little incentive to plant more and get more. I can understand the government of Ethiopia’s view [that] their obvious priority is feeding people today, now. But I think we have to have a parallel strategy. On our side making financial contributions, and on the government’s side, if they want to improve trade, [they should think in terms of] increasing certain liberalisation in certain areas. But we may also need to liberalise our markets, particularly for agricultural products... I don’t think it is 50 percent food aid and 50 percent long term, but I do know that in addition to aid one has got to have a longer-term policy. Otherwise we are just going to be permanently in destitution.