Difference between revisions of "Department for International Development"
Miriam Rose (talk | contribs) m (→Transparency) |
Miriam Rose (talk | contribs) m (→Transparency) |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
He exposes the gap between the picture of development aid painted here in the UK by DfID, and the reality on the ground in India. DfID is shown to be involved in pushing the industrialisation of India, particularly mineral extraction and processing. It is actively working with companies and corporations (many of them British), particularly aiding them through helping privatise utilities and services and monetarise the economy to their benefit, but having detrimental effect on the poorest people.<ref>Richard Whittell, Corporate watch [http://www.corporatewatch.org.uk/?lid=3513 Dodgy development: DfID in India] Accessed 30/04/10</ref> | He exposes the gap between the picture of development aid painted here in the UK by DfID, and the reality on the ground in India. DfID is shown to be involved in pushing the industrialisation of India, particularly mineral extraction and processing. It is actively working with companies and corporations (many of them British), particularly aiding them through helping privatise utilities and services and monetarise the economy to their benefit, but having detrimental effect on the poorest people.<ref>Richard Whittell, Corporate watch [http://www.corporatewatch.org.uk/?lid=3513 Dodgy development: DfID in India] Accessed 30/04/10</ref> | ||
| − | ==Transparency== | + | [[Media:Example.ogg]]==Transparency== |
In response to an FoI request to DfID for access to the report “Orissa Drivers of Change”(2005-2006), which is openly talked about on their website, DfID denied access to the report, claiming that there was: | In response to an FoI request to DfID for access to the report “Orissa Drivers of Change”(2005-2006), which is openly talked about on their website, DfID denied access to the report, claiming that there was: | ||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
:strong public interest in ensuring that DFID and the UK Government are able to promote international development and protect UK interests abroad. To do this there must be good working relationships with these other governments based on confidence and trust. Disclosing opinions and sensitive information relating to them would be likely to damage these relationships; harm DFID’s ability to work with and influence other donors in eradicating poverty and undermine the UK’s ability to respond to international development needs. <ref>John McGinn, DfID Openness Unit, FoI 2010-107 response letter.</ref> | :strong public interest in ensuring that DFID and the UK Government are able to promote international development and protect UK interests abroad. To do this there must be good working relationships with these other governments based on confidence and trust. Disclosing opinions and sensitive information relating to them would be likely to damage these relationships; harm DFID’s ability to work with and influence other donors in eradicating poverty and undermine the UK’s ability to respond to international development needs. <ref>John McGinn, DfID Openness Unit, FoI 2010-107 response letter.</ref> | ||
| − | See full Freedom of Information response | + | See full Freedom of Information response [[Media:here Orissa_DoC_denial_(DfID).pdf]] |
==People== | ==People== | ||
Revision as of 10:20, 25 August 2011
Contents
Critique
Corporate Watch writer Richard Whittell has carried out revealing research in a project entitled Dodgy development: DfID in India. He exposes the gap between the picture of development aid painted here in the UK by DfID, and the reality on the ground in India. DfID is shown to be involved in pushing the industrialisation of India, particularly mineral extraction and processing. It is actively working with companies and corporations (many of them British), particularly aiding them through helping privatise utilities and services and monetarise the economy to their benefit, but having detrimental effect on the poorest people.[1]
Media:Example.ogg==Transparency==
In response to an FoI request to DfID for access to the report “Orissa Drivers of Change”(2005-2006), which is openly talked about on their website, DfID denied access to the report, claiming that there was:
- strong public interest in ensuring that DFID and the UK Government are able to promote international development and protect UK interests abroad. To do this there must be good working relationships with these other governments based on confidence and trust. Disclosing opinions and sensitive information relating to them would be likely to damage these relationships; harm DFID’s ability to work with and influence other donors in eradicating poverty and undermine the UK’s ability to respond to international development needs. [2]
See full Freedom of Information response Media:here Orissa_DoC_denial_(DfID).pdf
People
Affiliations
- Adam Smith International
- sponsorship provided to the Center for Global Development[3].
References
- ↑ Richard Whittell, Corporate watch Dodgy development: DfID in India Accessed 30/04/10
- ↑ John McGinn, DfID Openness Unit, FoI 2010-107 response letter.
- ↑ Centre for Global Development Funders Accessed 22nd January 2008
