Follow us on Twitter
Let's be friendsIt’s likely that at some point in the campaign, you will get a response from the Department for International Development (DFID) to your actions.
At the beginning of the campaign, People & Planet sent a copy of our report, Fueling the Future to Hilary Benn, former Secretary of State for International Development. We have been in regular correspondence with him since. You can download the correspondence here:
- Letter from People & Planet to Hilary Benn, 16 November 2006
- Letter from Hilary Benn to People & Planet, 5 January 2007
- Letter from People & Planet to Hilary Benn, 12 April 2007
- Letter from Gareth Thomas to People & Planet, 17 September 2007
If you get a letter from DFID in response to your campaigning, write back! Let them know what you think of their arguments and what else you’re planning to do to keep the pressure up. To help you with your replies, we’ve produced a briefing note and some answers to questions below:
In February 2007 a group of People & Planet students met with Hilary Benn in Leeds to put the case for Ditch Dirty Development to him. Read what he had to say:
To monitor the campaign and make sure that we’re keeping up with any changes in their position (so we can help you with responses), it’s essential that if you get any communication from DFID or MPs, please send a copy to the People & Planet support office. You can also submit information on DFID’s arguments using the comment box at the bottom of this page. It would be really good to have a copy of your replies too.
For advice or help with replying to specific letters, email Bronwen in the People & Planet office.
DFID’s arguments
Oil and gas resources can contribute to poverty reduction and economic growth.
The World Bank has already committed to increasing support for renewable energy.
DFID says:
DFID is not directly funding oil and gas extraction, and World Bank funding for oil and gas isn´t very much money anyway.
We say:
World Bank funding for oil and gas may not be the biggest part of what they do, but it is still destructive, and reduces risks for fossil fuel companies, enabling projects to go ahead that otherwise might not. DFID directly supports the World Bank in continuing to fund oil and gas extraction.
DFID says:
Oil and gas resources can contribute to poverty reduction and economic growth.
We say:
The past evidence suggests that in the majority of cases, this does not happen. During the World Bank’s review of extractive industries, the World Bank was unable to put forward a single case of an extractive project which had had a positive impact on sustainable development.
DFID says:
DFID is working hard on the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (a programme which aims to increase the transparency of payments from oil and gas companies to host governments, to reduce corruption and improve accountability).
We say:
The Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative is a useful tool to try and combat corruption, but it does not alter the problem that funding oil and gas extraction leads to increased carbon emissions and contributes to climate change. This is the key point of our campaign.
DFID says:
The World Bank has already committed to increasing support for renewable energy.
We say:
Great — but this increase should be larger. The World Bank is committed to increasing financing for renewable energy by 20% a year for five years, but this is from a low starting point and includes large hydropower (which has negative social and environmental impacts). While increasing funding for renewables is positive, this is undermined by continued support for fossil fuels.
DFID says:
DFID and the World Bank bring high quality environmental, social and governance standards to countries they work with. DFID can have a positive influence on the outcome of extraction projects only if they are involved in the first place.
We say:
DFID should only be supporting those projects which are most effective in alleviating poverty, and we don’t believe oil and gas extraction is. DFID should be supporting the best projects, not making projects slightly less bad by their involvement.
The International Development Select Committee Inquiry into DFID and the World Bank (IDSC)
The International Development Select Committee (IDSC) is a committee of the House of Commons. It’s remit is to oversee the running of DFID on matters of expenditure, administration and policy.
The IDSC is holding an inquiry into DFID’s ability to assure the development aid delivered through the World Bank is in line with DFID’s own priorities and objectives. DFID’s contribution to the International Development Association (IDA), the arm of the World Bank that helps the world’s poorest, for 2005-2008 is £1.4 billion over the 3 years, 13% of total donor contributions.
The World Bank is the world’s single largest funder of development as well as a source of knowledge on issues of international trade, poverty, corruption and climate change.
As part of a coalition of UK NGOs, People & Planet submitted evidence on World Bank development aid in relation to climate change and energy funding.
You can read the full submission of evidence here.
If you get a letter from DFID with different arguments to those represented here, let us know by filling in this comment box. If you’ve got ideas for ways to respond to arguments that are different to those we’ve come up with, let us know these ideas as well.
