| DURING this past year, the UK has been celebrating the bicentenary of the Abolition of the Slave Trade Act. Today many millions, technically free, are none the less enslaved by poverty and international debt.
Ten years ago, a human chain of 70,000 people surrounded the meeting of G8 leaders in Birmingham as part of the Jubilee 2000 campaign. Since then, more than $88 billion has been cancelled — but the very poorest countries of the world remain weighed down by more than $300 billion in outstanding debt. More must be done to help them.
In the early days, people could not understand what we meant by odious debt, assuming, unthinkingly, that money borrowed had to be repaid. I remember an American bishop’s eyes popping, as I explained that donors must share responsibility when loans were made to support dictators, line corrupt pockets, or promote unnecessary and inappropriate projects. In addition, money was often lent on unfair and unsustainable terms to countries that could not afford it.
Furthermore, global economic changes — way beyond the power of the poorest to influence — contributed to a scenario where far too many of the world’s poorest countries were paying far more in debt-servicing than they actually received in aid. So-called development loans had too often become among the most damaging influences on poorest countries’ economies, since repayment was taking money that should have fed and cared for their own populations.
The Jubilee 2000 campaign, drawing its name from the ancient scriptural principle for freeing those enslaved by debt, took up the challenge. The human chain of 1998 was a remarkable achievement. I felt its impact two months later when, with the then Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Carey, I led a delegation of archbishops and bishops from the 1998 Lambeth Conference to meet the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Gordon Brown, and the Development Secretary, Clare Short.
In our discussions on poverty, we highlighted the effect that debt was having on many of our countries, and called for its cancellation. It was evident in their response that they were grasping the message that such debt had to be tackled.
THIS WAS not only an economic issue. It was a justice issue, because it affected the lives of the poorest and most vulnerable, none of whom had ever been asked whether they wanted this burden of debt to be put around their necks.
Thereafter, the United Kingdom took a lead in cancelling debts and pressing others to do the same. That said, considerable British loans to the poorest remain.
Therefore, although a great deal has been achieved, the Jubilee Debt Campaign must continue to press for more to be done. In particular, there must be easier access to such schemes for all who need them, and an overall scaling up of resources to effect relief.
There must be better assessment of how a country’s debt fits into its overall economic picture, so that the right terms and conditions can be applied. Help must be targeted at the very poorest. Money freed by relief must be channelled into broad-based development, and especially towards the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals — and there must be effective monitoring to ensure that this is really happening.
All this must take place within an improving climate of development policies, including further untying of aid, and improved conditionality. Many of these changes need to be put in place by the donor countries and institutions. The lesson of the human chain in 1998 is that sustained public pressure in the West can help effect such changes.
BUT THERE MUST be action from our side also. Within Africa, our governments need to have clear strategies to free themselves from the vicious cycle of debt. We need to acknowledge honestly our dependence on aid, especially where aid is used to fill the savings gap, and short- and long-term problems with financial flow. We need to put in place more viable mechanisms both for contracting new loans, and for managing them within our overall development strategies.
In all this, political and economic transparency is fundamental, so that our development strategies are set out clearly before our citizens, who are those most directly affected.
I AM GLAD to say that we are heading in the right direction. Our politicians are certainly using the right words within the African Union and its New Partnership for Africa’s Development initiative (NEPAD). NEPAD’s first goal is to eradicate poverty, and the primary commitment towards achieving this is good governance.
But we need our countries to walk the walk. Following the example of campaigns such as Jubilee 2000, African civil society is now much more active in holding our governments to account. As my contribution, I launched the African Monitor initiative two years ago. This is an independent, continent-wide organisation to monitor development-funding commitments and how they are delivered to the grass roots.
One of our priorities is to urge our governments to keep the promises they have made — particularly on good governance, but also in every other area of development, including the handling of debt, and policy when taking out new loans.
Ten years on, our slogan this year is “The Journey to Justice”. Together we are heading in the right direction — donor and recipient governments, civil society of North and South in partnership. Together we must find a lasting solution to the question of debt.
The Rt Revd Njongonkulu Ndungane is a former Archbishop of Cape Town. |
back to Comment
previous story
|
next story 
