Skip to main contentSkip to navigationSkip to navigation
The Houses of Parliament in London.
The Houses of Parliament in London. Kenya has turned away from its previous Westminster model to adopt a US-style presidential style. Photograph: Anthony Devlin/PA
The Houses of Parliament in London. Kenya has turned away from its previous Westminster model to adopt a US-style presidential style. Photograph: Anthony Devlin/PA

UK aid risks promoting US models of democracy, MPs say

This article is more than 9 years old

DfID using US organisations to strengthen parliaments in developing countries, advancing ‘less accountable’ American-style political systems, committee warns

The Department for International Development’s (DfID) extensive use of US organisations to strengthen parliaments in developing countries risks using British taxpayers’ money to promote “less accountable” American-style political systems at the expense of those based on the Westminster model, MPs have warned.

In a report published on Tuesday, the International Development Committee acknowledges that DfID is a major contributor to parliamentary strengthening – spending around £22.5m bilaterally last year – but urges it to ensure its long-term aid is being spent effectively by putting parliaments “at the heart of its governance work” and taking a more “hands-on approach” to the issue.

It expresses surprise at the extent to which the department relies on US organisations to build up parliaments, noting that “paradoxically DfID makes significantly more use of US than UK organisations”.

According to the report, seven of the current 37 parliament strengthening projects went to US managing agents, while only three went to Westminster providers. A list of key DfID suppliers shows that US-based organisations account for more than 55% of the department’s spending on parliamentary strengthening projects.

“We were told that extensive use of US organisations risks using UK taxpayer money to promote US models of democracy in Commonwealth countries,” says the committee.

“For example in Kenya, the State University of New York’s Centre for International Development was funded by a number of donors, including DfID and USAid, to do parliamentary strengthening work. Subsequent to this work, Kenya adopted a new constitution in 2010 with a US-style presidential model in place of its previous Westminster model.”

While the UK does not “explicitly promote its national parliamentary traditions”, says the report, the situation is very different in the US, where USAid set up the Consortium for Elections and Political Process Strengthening (Cepps) programme to provide funding for US institutions to work together to promote democracy in its country programmes.

“The Cepps and National Endowment for Democracy programmes provide some US institutions with an advantage over UK institutions; they have been effectively subsidised by US taxpayers to become powerful institutions well-positioned to win DfID tenders,” says the report.

“In contrast, Westminster institutions are largely unable to win bids for US money spent on promoting democracy since much of the money is reserved for core US institutions.”

The committee concedes that there are advantages to using large organisations such as the UN Development Programme (UNDP) when several donors are involved in parliamentary strengthening projects, or when they are taking place in fragile and conflict-affected states. But it recommends that DfID support the development of UK suppliers and “substantially increase” its use of them over the next five years.

The DfID annual report shows that the EU accounts for more than a quarter or all the department’s multilateral expenditure – “largely core funding over which DfID has little control” – while DfID provided almost £250m to the UNDP last year.

The committee says it is “seriously concerned” by some of the criticisms it has heard over EU commissioning in the area, “including the use of non-specialist contractors which are adept at navigating the institutions’ labyrinthine procurement procedures and its willingness to pay far more than is needed”.

Given that the UK taxpayer contributes about 15% of the money the EU spends on parliamentary strengthening, says the committee, DfID should look into the allegations “and in the light of its findings press for reform”.

Sir Malcolm Bruce MP, the Liberal Democrat chair of the committee, said: “There is a demand for expertise from the ‘Westminster brand’, especially from Commonwealth countries, but funds are funnelled through large providers in other countries rather than smaller expert organisations. More thought should be given to the ‘supply-side’ and how to build UK institutions into world class providers.”

Bruce said that while DfID had made improvements, it still needed to focus more on helping to forge robust parliaments to reduce poverty, conflict and corruption, and to increase accountability and security.

He added: “Though difficult with frequent setbacks, strengthening parliaments in developing countries has the potential to realise these benefits at relatively low cost.”

A DfID spokeswoman said the UK had designed and implemented more than 37 programmes to strengthen parliaments in 21 countries in a bid to help governments be more accountable and better equipped to tackle poverty. She added that the concerns identified in the report would be raised with the European Commission.

“Strong and accountable parliaments can be a vital part of a country’s path out of poverty,” said the spokeswoman. “We work with country experts and partners to deliver effective governance based upon a country’s individual needs.”

More on this story

More on this story

  • Hundreds of millions given to foreign aid fund that lacked scrutiny, say MPs

  • UK under fire for lax monitoring of investment in development agency

  • Former Nigeria state governor James Ibori receives 13-year sentence

  • Lib Dems' bid to enshrine UN aid target in UK law is pre-election hand grenade

Comments (…)

Sign in or create your Guardian account to join the discussion

Most viewed

Most viewed