---

Afghanistan: Farming

I am grateful to the noble Baroness for raising this important subject. I would have been even more grateful had it been standing room only at the back and had a lot more noble Lords been interested in the subject—it may be due not to a lack of interest but to other attractions. However, in the contributions that we have heard we have had quality even if we have not had quantity. I shall seek to answer the many questions that were asked, but perhaps I may start by putting the issue into context. It is one of those debates where there are no two sides; we have had a series of points, questions, criticisms—justifiable in many cases—and an understanding that we have to do more to alleviate the tragedy that is Afghanistan. While there is much to do, we have some successes to point to. As we all know, Afghanistan remains one of the world’s poorest countries. We know that the UK’s own security is threatened by continued instability in the Afghanistan and Pakistan region. We are committed to helping the Government of Afghanistan secure the future of their country and forge a better life for all Afghan people. Three years ago, the UK and Afghanistan signed a 10-year development partnership agreement. This April, the Secretary of State for International Development launched a new DfID country plan for Afghanistan, worth £510 million in aid over the next four years. That firmly underlines our commitment, and makes Afghanistan our fifth largest development programme world wide. Our efforts, civilian and military, are contributing at national and local levels towards helping Afghans overcome the insurgency and secure, govern and develop the country for themselves—a point that was made in the debate. It is worth looking back over the past seven years to some of the progress that has been made. This year, Afghanistan will hold its second set of democratic presidential elections. In the previous election, six out of 10 Afghans exercised their democratic rights by voting for the first time in more than 35 years—a figure that should make us slightly ashamed of our own voting performance in elections held recently. Five million refugees have been able to return home. And where just one in 10 Afghans lived in districts with access to basic healthcare, that figure is now up to eight in 10. Of course, very serious challenges remain across Afghanistan. In the past year, many Afghans have become more pessimistic about their personal safety and their country’s prospects for moving forward. Afghanistan is facing simultaneously four scourges that would individually trouble any country in the world: weak governance, poverty, insurgency and narcotics. It is the last of those challenges and how we find alternative ways forward which are at the centre of today’s debate. The noble Baroness spoke of alternative agricultural products to replace the farmers’ requirement to grow poppies. She made reference to Helmand province in particular, where the suggested alternative to poppy-growing is pomegranates through the project, POM354. DfID is supportive of the aims of POM354. Discussions have taken place with Mr Brett, who is no relation of mine—I say that to protect his reputation, not mine—and officials have offered technical assistance and advice. Our development programme works to create the economic conditions for organisations such as POM354 to succeed, but we do not fund individual initiatives. Our recommendation to Pom354 and its initiative is to produce a detailed business plan which will help to maximise the programme’s chances of success and help conversations with donors. DfID will continue to provide advice on such a plan. We have also had reference to the wheat-growing initiative, which I will come to in the latter part of my contribution. The noble Lord, Lord Ramsbotham, raises an important point about the infrastructure requirement to allow markets to work and the growers of products to have access without intimidation. DfID is supporting infrastructure in Helmand with £32 million over the next four years aimed at irrigation, the Lashkar Gah to Gereshk road—which addresses the question about access to markets—the Gereshk hydro-power plant, which will help to boost the economy and the opening of airfields for the first commercial flights at Bost on 3 June, together with £4.5 million for an agricultural centre to improve access to markets. We are also aware of the need to improve the economic and commercial background to the country. DfID is supporting the Afghanistan investment climate facility with £30 million to improve the regulatory environment in which to start businesses, removing some of those bureaucratic and difficult obstacles that prevent small businesses of any kind getting to the point at which they are sustainable. The noble Lord, Lord Avebury, raised a series of points that are all worthy of comment. He made a point which I echo, and to which the Government have already committed, which is of course our condolences on the death of Major Sean Birchall. It is a sad fact of life that our brave soldiers give service. That inevitably has its cost, which is a terrible burden for their families. Whenever we hear of the death of service personnel, support staff or the innocents involved, we can only send out our hearts to those who have lost a loved one. The noble Lord raised counter-IED technologies, on which the Americans, as he pointed out, are reported to be spending $4 billion. He gave me advance notice of the question, so I was able to seek reference to the ministerial Statement to the House of Commons made by the then Secretary of Defence, John Hutton, on 29 April. He made the point that units will provide important additional capabilities for UK forces in Afghanistan, and said: ""We shall also enhance our capability to counter Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs). These devices are a major threat to our troops, those of our allies and to the ordinary Afghan people. We are deploying personnel with a range of skills to detect, dispose and exploit IEDs and to prevent them being laid. Other personnel will improve our ability to defend our bases while we shall also reinforce our already significant reconnaissance capabilities. We shall increase the number of tactical unmanned aerial vehicles. We shall also deploy Sea King air surveillance and control helicopters and the new airborne stand-off radar. These complementary systems track use radar to track movements on the ground. ""They can help our forces to detect, follow and intercept insurgents before they can lay IEDs".—[Official Report, Commons, 29/4/09; col. 46WS.]" The noble Lord also referred to the extra 20,000 troops and sought positive feedback. We hope to see security gradually improving with the additional 20,000 NATO troops, and increasing numbers and efficiency in the Afghan National Army. Security is an important aspect of our long-term development efforts. It will allow for better access to markets and, in turn, offer farmers an alternative to poppy growing. Poppies are collected at the farm gate, while farmers take other crops to market—a point ably made the noble Lord, Lord Ramsbotham. NATO rules allow ISAF partners specifically to target individuals with narcotics interests. The noble Lord also raised development to replace the HARDP programme, how it has progressed and whether we can achieve a permanent and sustained transfer from poppy to wheat cultivation in Helmand. DfID has agreed in principle to fund the Helmand alternative livelihoods programme, the first stage of which will be operational by September. The aim of the programme is to reduce poppy cultivation, but its success will depend on the overall security situation and the development of market prices for poppy and agricultural produce. The noble Lord also raised the comparative lack of success of the GLE in other provinces compared with Helmand. He rightly made comments about the energy and efficiency of a particular governor and whether other governors were being encouraged or, indeed, removed if they do not achieve the same endeavours. At the moment, I prefer to take some comfort from the successes, but we need to seek to sustain and to improve the capabilities of the Government of Afghanistan in all the areas where we can clearly see weaknesses that need to be reduced. On illicit livelihoods, we have previously had a debate about whether poppy cultivation could be changed from illicit to licit, which, on that occasion, was not seen as an answer to the problem. Equally, eradication on its own will not solve the problem. It is an important deterrent and can play a catalytic role in influencing farmers to give up poppy cultivation. It needs to be balanced with measures to interdict drugs, bring criminals to justice, build institutions and encourage development of rural communities to provide alternatives for poppy farmers. It is essential to insert a credible risk to poppy growing and to target the big traders who will benefit most from the narcotics trade. We also need to ensure that we do not measure success merely based on the area where the poppy has been eradicated. The important factor is that the contribution of the poppy trade to the economy is falling, which is something from which we should take some comfort. We also have an answer to Mr Holbrooke’s call for a very significantly expanded agricultural sector job-creation set of programmes, which is a very firm yes. That is why DFID’s programmes focus on economic development and the agricultural sector, two key development priorities of the Afghan Government, as outlined in the Afghanistan National Development Strategy. We are also supporting several major infrastructure programmes in Helmand province to improve access to markets. That includes rebuilding the Lashkar Gah to Gereshk road, the refurbishment of the power plant and the recent resurfacing of Bost airfield. On the Government’s view of the transparency and accountability of the £32 million spent on aid, we are working hard to ensure that international aid to Afghanistan is more transparent and that the donor community holds the Afghan Government to account. We want to see other donors increase the proportion of aid which they spend directly through the Afghan Government’s systems and we are committed to spend at least 50 per cent of our aid through the Afghanistan Reconstruction Trust Fund, which is managed by the World Bank and independently monitored. The ARTF reimburses the Afghan Government on proof of legitimate expenditure. A significant proportion of international aid is spent through NGOs which promote alternative crops, but we are unable to provide a precise figure for that. The promotion of alternative crops is a key priority under the Afghan national drug control strategy, which informs the UNODC’s programmes. On central government, under the new country plan, DfID has placed renewed emphasis on supporting the Afghan Government in building credible state institutions. We are supporting the High Office of Oversight which is the Afghan body tasked with the implementation of the Government’s anti-corruption strategy. We are also helping the Afghan Government to strengthen the rule of law and we are supporting a number of NGO-led programmes to improve transparency and accountability. However, it is for the Afghans to elect their Government and to hold their Government to account. On the management response to DfID’s evaluation, which was raised by the noble Lord, DfID has committed £30 million over four years to the comprehensive agriculture and rural development facility—CARDF—to boost the agricultural sector and job creation in Afghanistan. We have focused on three pilot areas, including Nangahar, and we are working closely with the UNAMA agricultural task force and with the Afghan Ministry of Agriculture—MAIL—and Minister Rahimi to support MAIL’s reform programme. We are also in contact with the deputy special representative for UNAMA, Mark Ward, who is responsible for donor co-ordination. The question was also raised about the knowledge and experience of counternarcotics that we have acquired. I was asked whether we could transfer it to other donors, particularly our partners in the EU. The answer, again, is yes. Several EU partners are now interested in joining and supporting the CARDF programme, which is to be welcomed. The last point was on the PRTs and the roles that they have to play in CN strategy, bearing in mind their lack of an explicit mandate. The UK-led PRT in Helmand is an integral part of the development effort in Afghanistan; DfID works through and with the PRT to plan stabilisation and long-term development in Helmand province. The PRT works with the Afghan Government, line ministries and bilateral donors, and we understand that other PRTs do the same. There is no silver bullet to address the scourge of narcotics in Afghanistan, and I suspect that there is no particular silver bullet to provide one alternative solution, be it pomegranates, wheat or whatever. We have had success in the distribution of wheat; unfortunately, the production of wheat is dependent on price in the market and on having a successful harvest, which is something that farmers have had to be concerned about for centuries. That has proved in the past year or two to be very favourable in respect of Afghanistan; we cannot guarantee that we will have such success in climatic conditions in future. Our approach is to deliver real success. The Afghan Government’s existing programmes have contributed to the completion of some 28,000 community-led development projects, from agriculture, irrigation, and power and water supply, with another 50,000 on the way. The Government have distributed with our support some £500 million in small loans to 440,000 farmers, families and shopkeepers to help to invest in new ways to feed their families. In Helmand, where the US funded the governor’s food zone programme, to which I referred when talking about wheat production, wheat seed was distributed to 32,000 farmers as an alternative to growing poppy. While it is too early to make a long-term judgment, it has proved to be a success in the early stages. As a result, we have seen the decrease of poppy production by some 19 per cent across the country. Only two years ago, six provinces could claim to be free of poppy; today it is 18—just over half of the 34 provinces of Afghanistan. However, we recognise that progress is fragile. The risk of reversal is a high one; although higher wheat prices, lower poppy prices and the climate have worked in our favour, we cannot guarantee such factors. We can guarantee that our commitment to Afghanistan is long term, as is our commitment to democracy and the freedom of its people. Our commitment to assisting the democratically elected Government and their agencies to bring a better life for Afghanistan’s people is also long term, and I hope that this debate will stimulate thought and encourage others to continue to support the efforts that we make. I am very grateful to the noble Baroness for bringing this debate to our Table and to noble Lords who have contributed. I hope that I have answered their questions in my responses as well as joining in with the chorus of support for what we are doing and encouragement to do more. Sitting suspended.