Cabinet Reshuffle: Change at DFID

As mentioned on GfGD's Facebook page - last week David Cameron reshuffled his Government, and made some changes to the Department for International Development (DFID).

Andrew Mitchell who has served as Secretary of State since 2010, and Shadow Secretary of State since 2005 moved to another brief within the Cabinet. He was replaced by Justine Greening. Lower down the ministerial ranks, Stephen O'Brien (Parliamentary Under-Secretary for International Development) was also replaced by Lib-Dem MP Lynne Featherstone. Alan Duncan retains his position as Minister of State. 

Many people will have their own opinions about the successes and failures of the past two and a half years of Coalition Government, and in particular how DFID has progressed. You can read a variety of posts and opinions on the Guardian (see Jonathan Glennie, Liz Ford and Sol Oyuela for example). The general feeling from tweets, articles and blog comments however seems to be that Andrew Mitchell can leave DFID with his head held high. After five years as Shadow Secretary of State, he was described as being one of the 'best-prepared' secretary of states with genuine 'commitment to the sector.' 

Here a few of my own thoughts. In my opinion, and I would certainly welcome other's thoughts and comments Mitchell has been one of the higher profile Secretary of States in recent times, bringing some positive leadership and direction to this department, that showed that a genuine belief in the importance of development. In the difficult economic climate, there has been little (vocal) public support for ringfencing DFID's budget. Despite this, Mitchell has worked solidly to defend and promote the importance of supporting the world's poorest communities which must be commended. It is regretful and disappointing that he didn't oversee the promised legislating of 0.7% of GDP to international development. I also have concerns that the focus on value for money, which is not unwelcome, could bring about a reluctance to support projects bringing long-term results. Vaccines are much easier than hygiene education for example. It should also be noted that Stephen O'Brien was held in high regard by a number within the development community. 

Justine Greening and her ministerial team, therefore have a big responsibility to build on this work, and have a lot in their various in-trays. Greening must continue to fight to win the argument over the 0.7% of GDP, standing up to some fellow Conservative MPs who are sceptical to say the least. In the event of pressure from the Treasury to back down on this pledge, Greening must remember the promise of her predecessor not to balance the books on the backs of the world's poorest. Greening should also re-examine the 'value for money' approach taken by Mitchell - to ensure that DFID are not just taking a short term approach to development, in order to show rapid results. Real value for money comes from investing in long-term change, prevention rather than cure. Alongside these massive tasks, DFID will be taking a leading role in the development of post Millennium Development Goal targets, must continue to implement the HERR recommendations and many other tasks.

Overall, we should be proud of the fact that the UK has an overseas development department, and the work that we do to fight poverty and improve the lives of communities around the world. Both Andrew Mitchell and Justine Greening are privileged to have led and to lead such an important department.  

Engaging with Parliament

A few weeks ago I was reading about the worsening situation in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Unrest and conflict in this country has resulted in the death, abuse and rape of many innocent civilians. I decided to send an e-mail to my MP, Vince Cable, urging him to encourage the government to ensure they take all necessary steps to secure a long-lasting, sustainable peace for the people of that huge nation, and that humanitarian support is ready in the event that the situation worsens in the east of the country.

Within a week of sending the e-mail, I had a letter back from Dr Cable saying that he'd written to both the International Development Secretary and Foreign Secretary with the concerns I was expressing. After a further week I had a letter back from the Department for International Development. In the UK, we have significant opportunities we have to engage with those who make and shape important decisions, through our constituent MPs, and others. 

Whether it's writing a letter to your MP, sending them an e-mail, or arranging to meet with them to discuss an issue at one of their surgeries - we should all make the most of these opportunities to let our views be heard, to express our opinions (be they ones of agreement or disagreement), and to ask questions. It's very easy to be sceptical about politics, about what influence we have with these communications - but they are opportunities that many people across the world would love to have. I also sincerely believe that they are opportunities that have and can genuinely influence mindsets, votes and ultimately policy.

It's not just our local MPs we can engage with, you can also contact Government Ministers and Departments, All-Party Parliamentary Groups, MEPs and Devolved Administrations (in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland). You can find most relevant e-mails, and contact details on the internet using a search engine such as Google or this site is also very helpful!

Reminder: Write To Your MP

Clean water and access to good sanitation benefit many other areas of development. "When we get it right [water and sanitation], so much else follows" says Alan Duncan, UK Minister for International Development. Join our campaign to write to as many local MPs as possible to tell them that we believe it is right and good news that the Government is doubling the number of people it intends to reach with clean water and access to good sanitation. 

Find out more about what to do here...

Write to Your MP: UK to Double Support for Water and Sanitation

Last week we posted on our Facebook wall the fantastic news that the UK Government has decided to double its support to water and sanitation projects in the world's poorest countries. The UK Department for International Development (DFID) will work to secure access to clean drinking water and proper sanitation for more than 60million people over the lifetime of this parliament.

As we have posted numerous times, access to clean water and good sanitation has a knock-on benefit to many other areas of life. It means children will no longer have to walk many miles to collect water, thus increasing the time they can spend at school. It means health problems, many avoidable diseases, can be reduced. This is turn can improve the life expectancy of mothers giving birth and young children especially. Improved health, through drinking clean water, can mean less days are lost to sickness and so people have the freedom to work and generate income. In fact, for every £1 spent on water and sanitation in the developing world, it is estimated by the United Nations that a staggering £8 is returned in reduced health costs, saved time and better productivity.

Alan Duncan, Minister of State at DFID, recently stated in a debate to mark World Water Day:

"Ensuring access to water and sanitation for the poorest is, to pick a metaphor, the bread and butter of development. When we get it right, so much else follows: children become more likely to reach their fifth birthday, and they are healthier and in a better position to benefit from education; women, who carry most of the world’s water, are empowered; and economic growth and prosperity are enhanced and facilitated. While we fail to deliver those most basic necessities, not only are there an estimated 2.4 million preventable deaths each year, but generations of people become trapped in poverty."

Any increase in the support the UK gives to water projects is fantastic news and deserves to be celebrated. We are asking those readers of the GfGD Blog who are UK Citizens to take this opportunity to write a brief letter to their constituency MP to express your support for this decision. It is important to let our MPs know when there is something we are happy with, as well as something we are not happy with. There is much debate about the UK aid budget at the moment, and it will be great for many MPs to hear that we think giving more support to water projects is the right thing! 

Some of you may be regular letter-writers to your MP, others may have never done it before. Here's our simple step-by-step guide:

(1) Work out who your MP is by putting your postcode into this website

(2) Write a letter addressed to your MP, stating why you are writing, why this is important to you and what you'd like your MP to do. 

(3) The letter can be very brief - the more concise the better. You can use some of the information in this blog post or other posts, or do further research if you'd like. Make sure you are polite.

(4) Post the letter to your MP (!)

At a cost of 50-60p for a stamp and about 10 minutes of your time - there's no real reason not to get involved in this GfGD activity! Once you've sent your letter - why not comment on this blog, stating who you are, what you do (e.g. PhD Student at King's College London) and which MP you wrote to. It will be great to see how many different MPs we've managed to contact to tell them that clean water and good sanitation save the lives of many of the world's poorest communities!

GfGD and Parliament

When establishing GfGD, I was keen to ensure communication with policy makers, advocacy and effective lobbying formed a key part of the work we do. Geoscience can inform many aspects of policy, and it is our responsibility as geoscientists to ensure that our work is being communicated to those with influence over policy – be that Ministers, backbench MPs or other policy makers.

Last week I had a number of opportunities to engage with MPs through events taking place in London. As a representative of the Geological Society, I took part in an event ‘Voice of the Future 2012’, in Westminster. It was an interesting event, with some positive outcomes and opportunities for further engagement.

NERC Funding of MSc Courses



David Willetts MP

The first such outcome was an opportunity to challenge David Willetts MP, Minister for Science and Universities, about NERC’s decision to end all funding for postgraduate taught Masters courses. The University of Leeds has already been forced to close its Geochemistry and Hydrogeology courses, and there has been a decline in numbers for the Engineering Geology course. These courses are essential stepping stones for geoscientists wishing to move into either industry or research after their undergraduate degree, or gain skills and further qualifications if already within industry. They provide essential training and skills for many of the problems and projects the UK will face in the coming years, and give graduates the skills to engage in projects all over the world, including the developing world.

The Minister acknowledged the crucial role of postgraduate taught Masters courses, and the difficult nature of this decision. MSc courses are in a difficult position as they are on the boundary between teaching and research – and don’t fit into either budget. It was welcomed to hear him acknowledge the importance of these courses and the problems of funding them. He also pointed out that students can get Career Development Loans, and that funding from university teaching budgets could help support these courses. This aspect of the answer was far from satisfactory, and I will be writing to the Minister to further highlight and explain our serious concerns about this decision, and the impact it is already having. There was support for the kind of courses NERC used to sponsor from Andrew Miller MP, Chairman of the Science and Technology Select Committee, and we will also be following up this conversation.

We are suggesting that students, and those who have previously benefitted from NERC funding for MSc courses, write to David Willetts MP and their constituency MP to express their concern at the impact this decision is having. You can find details of MP contact addresses on the internet. Letters must be polite and respectful, outlining your concerns about the impact this will have on the UK skills base, and the UK’s ability to engage in a global market.

Geoscience and Development

Andrew Miller MP (Source: Parliament.uk)

A further opportunity at the event was the opportunity to speak with Andrew Miller MP about the Select Committee inquiry into the role of science within international development. I asked the Chairman about the way in which the Department for International Development (DFID) gets its geoscience information to shape policy and projects, and how geoscientists can improve the way it communicates information to DFID, and DFID use this information, to have more effective development and humanitarian work. Mr Miller decided that this would be an ideal question to be asked to Stephen O’Brien MP, a Minister at DFID, during his evidence session during the inquiry. The evidence session will be held on the 25th June at Portcullis House, London, and is open to the public. I look forward to hearing the response of the DFID Minister to this question. It is great to have the role of geoscience in development acknowledged and discusses in this important report.

Communication to Policy Makers

Finally, the same Andrew Miller MP gave the Sir Peter Kent Lecture at the Geological Society last week, speaking about the role of geoscience in shaping public policy. He set out a clear challenge to us as geoscientists to engage in the need to improve the communication between scientists, policy makers and the public. This is something Geology for Global Development is keen to do, and keen to equip our members to do as we grow and develop.

Online Petition - Zimbabwe's 'Blood Diamonds'

Recently we posted a blog urging the Government to push for an immediate end to the export of diamonds from the  Marange field of Zimbabwe, while an independent and thorough investigation into alleged crimes against humanity is completed. If you are a UK citizen you can now sign an e-petition calling on Her Majesty's Government to:

(1) Lobby the Kimberley Process (regulating the sale of diamonds) to reverse the decision made earlier this year to allow the export of diamonds from two mines in the Marange region. 

(2) Lobby the Kimberley Process to instigate an urgent, thorough and independent investigation of the allegations of crimes against humanity. 

(3) Act decisively and rapidly on the findings of this investigation, to ensure that profits from the sale of these diamonds does not fuel further conflict in the nation, conflict which pushes people deeper into poverty. Profits must be used to benefit the Zimbabwe's citizens - improving infrastructure, food security, health and education. 

You can find the petition online here, and publicise it using Twitter and Facebook. In the event that this petition reaches 100,000 signatures over the next few months it will be considered for a debate in the House of Commons. Please do forward the link to this petition to anybody you think may be interested.

Geology for Global Development is a UK-based organisation working to raise the profile of international development within the geoscience community. As part of our work we undertake an advocacy programme - aiming to fight poverty and improve the lives of communities around the world through working to shape policy and lobbying Government. You can read more at www.gfgd.org/projects/advocacy.  

International Dimensions of Climate Change

Recently the UK Government's Chief Scientific Officer (Sir John Beddington), and the Government Office for Science, published a document titled International Dimensions of Climate Change, outlining how international climate change may affect the UK and the required response from policy-makers. Even if we do not see significant changes of climate in the UK, there are likely to be significant effects to our foreign policy, security, economy etc from climate change overseas.

The report includes an excellent overview of global climate change (Chapter 2) including key tipping points (page 28) and key effects (page 30-), as well as chapters on the threats and challenges to the UK from international climate change. The report convincingly argues that the global nature of finance, trade, resources, infrastructure and health mean that a changing climate overseas could cause significant challenges to the UK. It also argues that the knowledge and skills of UK engineers, businesses, research institutes and other organisations mean that the UK is well placed to play a leading role in a post-carbon world. There are a number of UK-based geologists, geographers and other scientists playing a significant role on the world stage in this field.

Another aspect of this report, covered the need for behavioural change in the UK. A while ago The Times published an article in which it quoted this report and Sir John Beddington, stating that climate-related disasters should be used by the Government to persuade British voters to accept unpopular policies for cutting carbon emissions. The report argues that there appears to be growing scepticism of climate change, and a low percentage of people believing that individual responsibility is required. The report states:

"Effective, consistent communication and education linking climate change impacts to events overseas allows the UK government to encourage domestic behavioural change and the adoption of low-carbon technologies."

Whilst in theory this sounds like a reasonable recommendation, I have some concerns that this could lead to further scepticism if claims are not made in a responsible manner, without the backing of good evidence and science. There is scepticism when overseas events are declared to be as a result of 'climate change' by the media, NGOs or Government, without any reasonable evidence. Some events most likely are linked to climate change (amongst other things), but credible and reliable evidence must be used to show this. Whilst this report emphasises a number of times the uncertainty in this field, the difficulties and caveats involved within modelling such complex systems, and that policies should be science and evidence based - Government Ministers (as well as the media, NGOs and others) do not always clarify their statements in such a way.

This report is definitely worth reading, very helpful and well qualified. I would certainly hope that if Government's implement some of the recommendations in this report they do so in a responsible manner. Government's must base their conclusions on good evidence-based science - and do not simplify what are often complex issues. We would urge the Government to speak on these issues in a responsible way in order to effectively communicate these important issues. 

Zimbabwe's Blood Diamonds

Photo Courtesy of USGS

At the end of June I wrote about troubles in the Kimberley Process - after a controversial decision was made to allow Zimbabwe to sell diamonds from the Marange field, despite concern that money from these sales would be used to fund violence and human rights abuses. It was deeply troubling, therefore, to see the BBC Panorama programme (available here for the next 12 months) interviewing witnesses who stated that there had been massacres to clear the diamond fields for the military. They also described torture camps where civilians caught mining independently (and others working on the military mines) were beaten, raped and tortured. While these reports are strongly denied by the Zimbabwean government these gravest of allegations must be thoroughly investigated before any Zimbabwean diamonds are allowed to access the world market.

The International Response

The EU initially refused to accept the decision made by the Kimberley Process earlier this year to allow exports of diamonds from two mines. It has since changed its mind, and now backs this partial lifting of the ban, while maintaining that bans should still be in place on the other mines. According to a statement made by the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office they are in agreement with this controversial decision. While understanding that experts have assessed the two mines in question and deemed that they meet international standards, if the allegations made by Panorama are true then this calls the decision made by the Kimberley Process into question.


OUR POSITION: The income from the sustainable extraction and export of minerals, precious metals and precious stones can bring tremendous benefit to communities in poverty. There is significant doubt that the income from diamonds in the Marange field will contribute to the sustainable economic and social development of Zimbabwe. If the allegations made by Panorama are true then there must be an immediate end to all diamond exports from this nation, a strengthening of political sanctions and an investigation of crimes against humanity by the International Criminal Court, with arrest warrants issued if necessary.

We would strongly urge the UK Government and European Union to push for a complete ban on all diamond exports from the Marange region until a thorough and independent investigation of these allegations has been made.

If you are a UK citizen we would also invite you to write to your MP to ask them to lobby the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office on this issue. Simply outline your concerns and ask them to push for a complete ban and a thorough investigation. If you are a citizen of another country, we would urge you to contact your appropriate Government representative.

World Water Day

Today Tearfund and WaterAid, under the coalition of charities End Water Poverty, organised an event for World Water Day outside the Houses of Parliament. Members of Parliament from all the main parties came along to show their support and help raise awareness of the plight of millions across the world who lack access to clean water and sanitation. MPs walked a 100m course while talking with supporters of both charities about the need for more action on water and sanitation. It was great to see both Andrew Mitchell (Secretary of State for International Development) and Harriet Harman (Shadow Secretary of State for International Development) amongst those taking part.

Before the event Fiona Bruce MP talked to us about the need for people across the UK to contact their MP and urge them to speak up on this issue. At a debate on water not too long ago, only a handful of MPs turned up to discuss the issue. Why not write to your local MP (find them here), or make an appointment to visit them at their surgeries, and make sure they are aware of the shocking truth that 4000 children die each day due to lack of clean water and poor sanitation. MPs can get information by contacting either Tearfund or WaterAid, and can sign Early Day Motion 1632, stating:

"That this House welcomes World Water Day taking place on 22 March; considers access to clean water and sanitation vital for a healthy life; acknowledges that for every 1 invested in water and sanitation there is an economic return of 8; recognises that one in three people globally still lack access to basic sanitation and one in eight people are without access to safe drinking water; notes the severe negative impact this has on human health, education and livelihoods; further notes that diarrhoea is the biggest killer of children under five years in Africa, and that in India over 600 million people defecate in the open; recognises that there is a need for urgent and substantial progress against the water and sanitation Millennium Development Goal targets; and urges the Government to increase significantly its ambition for the sector commensurate to the scale of the global crisis, and play an essential leadership role in Sanitation and Water for All by encouraging further donor countries to sign up."

Currently there are only a small handful of MPs, out of 650, who have signed EDM1632. It would be great to see a huge surge of interest in this debate and many more MPs become passionate advocates for clean water and good sanitation in developing countries.


25th March 2011, Editors Note: Currently only 32 MPs have signed the Early Day Motion, so please do continue to lobby your MP to sign this important statement.