International assistance to Africa came under close scrutiny at a Parliamentary Conference in the European Parliament last week. Official Development Assistance (ODA) has long been subjected to severe criticism by policy makers, legislators and academics for deficiencies which have still to be resolved. Recently there has been a strong move in Europe for ODA to be coordinated by donor countries and to be transferred as Budget support rather than allocations to individual projects. This would obviously make monitoring of spending much easier.

However the conference of Parliamentarians from Europe and Africa, organized by Awepa, noted that such monitoring would be done by donor governments without checks and balances. It was noted that although donor governments had to get approval from their respective parliaments this was often token. Equally, where ODA is for budget support, the recipient parliaments have only cursory information available.

Yet, ODA is actually public money, derived from ordinary tax payers, many being humble working people, who agree to their money being used to relieve poverty in Africa. In intention, ODA is a people to people transfer, and not an exercise between governments at the whim of ministers.

It was also noted that the actions of governments are not always in tune with the will of the people. An example was the view of Margaret Thatcher that Mandela was a terrorist, where a large portion of the British public supported the anti-apartheid struggle led by the ANC.

Further more, in many cases tensikon between two governments, does not preclude friendship between their peoples, and this may be expressed by substantial individual donations to Africa supporting charities.

It was noted that government tend to pursue self-interest driven economic policies, at times neglecting the consideration of how these might become mutually beneficial between rich and poor countries.

All these considerations have come into prominence because of the constant refrain in the Europe-Africa dialogue between governments that the relationship should be based on “partnership” But the concrete specification of what that partnership might be is not spelled out.

In these ongoing consultations, and in numerous documents, it is specified that ODA is contingent on good governance. While the meeting agreed that good governance is necessary, it cannot be imposed from, outside. Good governance in a country is a function of good political leadership, and of many other factors which cannot arise artificially. In some cases good governance fails because the government cannot deliver do to a lack of resources. Indeed, in Africa there is a clear correlation of political instability to the lack of material resources. There is a struggle by opposing groups for scarce resources.

Since the conference was convened by the Slovenian Presidency of the EU with the explicit intention of involving for the first time the new member states from central Europe, it was noted that these states have much experience of political transition from one system to another, that they too have large internal inequalities and areas of backwardness.

Nevertheless there seems to be a significant desire to assist Africa, and in some cases, they are already ahead of some older European countries.

It was suggested that their experience in moving up the value chain in economic development could make them better understand similar problems in Africa. There could be transfer of skills, as well as a rigorous examination of economic complementarities with Africa to the benefit of both.

While a current donor package requires peace and security as another precondition, this could not be ensured by a magic donor wand.

Trade between Europe and Africa is currently bedeviled by the insistence of Economic Partnership Agreements (EPA’s) which include new issues beyond traditional trade in goods. It was argued that Africa must be allowed a degree of protectionism against imports from Europe, in the same way that European industrialization was built on the back of protectionist measures.

The conference endorsed a programme of action which will; commit parliaments in Europe and Africa to monitor ODA systematically. It was agreed that all future ODA packages should include a small component for the recipient Parliament to enable it to establish appropriate instruments to monitor ODA.

This issue is due to be further discussed at a meeting of the National Assembly of the Council of Europe in Paris in March, and it is one of the leading themes of the forthcoming International Parliamentary Union conference of some 1,500 parliamentarians from across the globe to be held in Cape Town in April.

All the indications are that the parliamentary monitoring o of ODA by parliaments in both donor and recipient countries is about to become a reality.