In the foreword to Labour’s new policy paper, Jeremy Corbyn characterises the party’s vision for development as “a progressive, outward-looking, global view, driven by social justice and human rights”. So far, so expected.
For those who remember the Blair-Brown era of Make Poverty History, the most exciting shift is the plan to tackle rising inequalities alongside the more familiar focus on reducing poverty, treating inequality and poverty as two sides of the same coin.
Speaking at the launch, Kate Osamor, shadow secretary of state for international development, described inequality as, “the challenge of our lifetime”.
Five priorities are set out: a fairer global economy; a global movement for public services; a feminist approach to development; building peace and preventing conflict; and action for climate justice and ecology.
Dismissing the current Conservative government’s approach as stemming from charity rather than social justice, the paper emphasises what is universal – what people want and need in the UK, people need and want everywhere – and argues for an international development policy that seeks to transform the status quo.
The radical ambition of Corbyn’s team is clear in the intention to “redistribute power to the people” and the title: “A World For The Many Not The Few”. But will it be embraced by the centre?
Underpinning the paper is the belief that poverty is not natural, but human-made as a result of the existing economic system.
It proposes democratising key international economic governance institutions like the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and the World Trade Organisation, to ensure countries in the global south have a greater voice in the decisions affecting them – a tough ask, especially with Brexit and Donald Trump in the mix, but long overdue.
Again, the call to end the tax evasion that deprives southern countries of resources crucial for development is not new, but the political will to tackle UK-controlled tax havens seems stronger than in Cameron’s golden thread.
In a fairer international trade system with well-regulated business, it says, low-income countries will be able to “build their tax base and ease their debt burdens” to develop themselves.
The rebalancing theme is evident in the call for an international commission to explore the possibility of a global wealth tax, as suggested by economist Thomas Piketty and a review of patents so that poorer countries can access the drugs and technologies they need.
Greens will like the emphasis on a more ecological economy, living within planetary boundaries, and the interest in finding alternatives to GDP as a measure for economic progress. They will note the divestment from fossil fuels in favour of decentralised, publicly owned renewable energy.
The report backs freely accessible, high quality public services such as health, education and social services, flagging years of failed policy in these areas.
Following the lead set by Sweden and Canada, the report calls for a feminist approach to development. It argues that achieving gender equality requires taking on ingrained patriarchy, not just tackling issues like child marriage or female genital mutilation in isolation. The gender pay gap gets a topical mention as embedding inequality in every country in the world. Much will depend on the promise to triple funding to grassroots organisations.
The importance given to local ownership and civil society action is encouraging.
Noting the threat to development from a recent rise in conflicts, terror attacks and forced displacement, it reintroduces Robin Cook’s “ethical foreign policy”, as the answer to “viable, long-term solutions to crisis and conflict”.
As the vision is broader than the focus on aid that so preoccupies much public debate on development, the biggest implementation challenge will be the cooperation it would entail across government ministries.
The ambition is likely to be well received by many frustrated at the current rather battered state of development policy, further fatigued by the recent safeguarding scandals, even if many a promise can be made in opposition.
Some would want to see more on research and digital futures. Many will welcome the greater inclusion of southern voices and especially the twin goals of tackling rising inequalities alongside poverty reduction. But truly transforming the world order requires root and branch reform – tough to imagine with some current world leaders still in place.
Fans of growth-first, trickle-down economics won’t be surprised to be disappointed.
