Proceeding contribution from Sally Keeble (Labour) in the House of Commons on Friday, 26 February 2010. It occurred during Debate on bill on Debt Relief (Developing Countries) Bill.
Debt Relief (Developing Countries) Bill
I think the £1.2 billion is the amount currently in the process of being sued in all the actions that have been referred to. So the amount that the HIPC countries will be deprived of if the Bill is not enacted is about £1.2 billion—[Interruption.] Okay, but it would make a very significant difference in terms of what it could buy in the way of services for the countries concerned, so this legislation would be effective. On the risk premium, one argument is that although the measure might provide this little bit of money to developing countries—£145 million, or whatever it is—because it will increase the cost of credit for those countries, in the long run it will be damaging. That view has also been put forward by some commentators in their submissions, but it is not well founded for several reasons. The measure will certainly increase the risks for the vulture funds—and frankly, good thing, too. If it discourages them from taking actions that are unacceptable, or denies them the opportunity to make cheap money at British taxpayers' and developing country populations' expense, then we should recognise, as my hon. Friend the Minister said, that those are the morally repugnant activities that it is intended to prevent, while allowing for orderly wind-downs. As is clear in the Bill and as my hon. Friend the Minister pointed out, future debts are specifically excluded and rightly so, because the Bill deals with the HIPC process, which relates to historic debt. Therefore, the Bill will not increase the risks for the future; however, there is a much bigger issue. The hon. Member for Christchurch talked about the appalling track record of some developing countries, and about Government corruption, Swiss bank accounts and so on. The thing that will really encourage proper investment and the proper handling of debts and credit in developing countries is their having sound, growing economies, good governance, strong institutions and all the other things required for stable growth in the long-term. That is what will give investors the greatest confidence, and it is precisely what the HIPC process is designed to do, as my hon. Friend the Minister said. It is not just a question of saying, "Oh dear, these people can't pay their debts. They are a basket-case—we are going to write the debts off." It is about deciding how we handle the development process for these historic debts, which have shackled such countries in a terrible way and left them vulnerable to exploitation by the vulture funds, so that they can build more secure futures. That is precisely what responsible, ethical, sound investors would want to see happen in these countries, and this Bill is part of achieving just that. It is really important that this Bill gets through all its stages and on to the statute book, and I am very grateful for the support of the hon. Member for Hazel Grove (Andrew Stunell). We obviously could not get through all the stages today because, rightly, it needs scrutiny and discussion and people need to see that happen so that they can be reassured. However, we do need to get it through before the election and time is limited, so I hope we can get Government time for Committee stage, and Opposition support for that. I urge my hon. Friends who are the business managers, and the hon. Member for South-West Hertfordshire, to ensure that that happens, because there is a further issue at stake: the credibility of this House and of our processes. What the many people who have a burning passion for and interest in this subject will have heard this morning is that there is a real economic logic to the proposals in the Bill. There is also an ethical imperative; indeed, I think this is the first time I have heard a Minister describe something as morally repugnant—certainly a Treasury Minister talking about financial activities. The Bill is therefore receiving stronger ethical support and a stronger push from the Front Bench than many other things do. It would also probably be supported by some 90 per cent. of the financial services industry, which operates in a completely proper way and has been involved in the writing off of some of the debts of such countries.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 506 c582-4
- Session
- 2009-10
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Contracts Debts Developing countries Debts written off Heavily indebted poor countries initiative Liberia Zambia Vulture funds
- Legislation
- Debt Relief (Developing Countries) Bill 2009-10
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 19:57:30 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_624763
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_624763
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_624763