It’s in Canada’s interest to boost foreign aid

There is enough money, write Michael Bopp and Randy Rudolph.

In 1970, the UN adopted a recommendation put forward by a commission on international development led by Canada’s Lester B. Pearson, which called on donor countries to contribute 0.7 per cent of their gross national income to development aid.

The primary reason for the almost universal acceptance in principle of this standard was the growing recognition that we live in a global community, and therefore, the poverty, powerlessness and misery of any of us is actually happening to all of us.

A handful of European countries have consistently met or approached this target. Canada has always fallen far short. In 2017, our aid and development assistance contribution level was 0.26 per cent, slightly down from a decade ago. Not only are we far below 0.7 per cent, but we are also well below the 0.32 per cent average for the 29 members of the international Development Assistance Committee.

This year, Canada is assuming the chairmanship of the G7, and is better positioned to provide leadership about international development on the global stage than we have been for a very long time. Here are seven reasons why Canada should meet the global standard proposed by Pearson.

1. If we want to join the superpowers of international development at the table, and wield the kind of international influence we are capable of, we need to pony up. Money talks.

2. We live in an interconnected world. What happens “over there” soon impacts us “over here.” Development brings security, peace and prosperity, and greater security, peace and prosperity “over there,” brings tremendous benefits to Canadians, such as greater levels of international security, the opening of new markets and business opportunities.

3. Uneducated women and girls are the greatest untapped resource on the planet. Without more money, we cannot reach them on a scale that will make a real difference.

4. Aid effectiveness requires innovation. We need a bigger aid envelope to create space for the testing of innovation by small, nimble nongovernmental organizations, which have shown the greatest capacity to create better outcomes at lower costs.

5. Addressing climate change requires addressing poverty on a global scale. Not only does poverty drive people to actions that can hurt the environment, but the poorest are inevitably the most impacted by climate-change-related shocks, which in turn have led to civil unrest, conflict and mass migration.

6. There are more displaced persons than ever before in recorded history. The burden of human suffering as a result of forced migration due to conflict, climate change or extreme economic pressure has led to millions of people trapped in refugee camps and living under miserable conditions, sometimes for generations. Serious attention is needed to improve the plight of these people, and that will require more resources and innovative solutions.

7. Canada is a very wealthy country. Most experts agree that it is within our grasp as a global family to make extreme poverty history.

One final point. People who oppose foreign aid on principle argue that we should be spending our money at home taking care of our own, and letting others solve their own problems. Behind this argument is what might be called “scarcity thinking.” There isn’t enough money, people will say. But this is a false narrative.

It’s not that there isn’t enough money, it’s that a huge proportion of the world’s wealth is concentrated in very few hands. The 42 richest people in the world control more wealth than the poorest 50 per cent of the world’s population.

There is enough money, and the small increase for development in the 2018 federal budget year is welcome. We just have to make it a higher priority. Why should we do that? Because our survival as a human family depends upon it. We are all interconnected.

Canada has always fallen far short.