Overseas Aid
Jersey people showed in their amazing response to the tsunami that we really do care. And it is not just the tsunami – a host of groups and individuals do their best to show that we really do stand “Side by Side” with the poorest in our world. It’s just that the States acting on our behalf is so mean, giving in Overseas Aid around 0.2%, a fraction of the UN target of 0.7%. (For those who think we “cannot afford it” see here)

I have exciting ideas about how Jersey could use Overseas Aid. Better links with local organisations; genuine partnership with one or two countries with 2-way learning and sharing; linking up with Durrell to deliver life-giving solutions for people, wildlife and planet.

Other States policy measures with global implications
States procurement policies and States investment policy should be ethically directed, and avoid support for dictators, destruction of habitat, bad working conditions, etc.

Funding for Jersey Overseas Aid

In the carbon savings scheme which I am proposing (see here section 10) we have the mechanism to fund an increase in Overseas Aid, whilst at the same time tackling climate change.


Perhaps here is the holy grail, a way of raising the aid budget in an acceptable and sensible way. It is a win-win. We use less non-renewable energy. Therefore we gain in security of supply, affordability, flexibility. The world wins as our carbon footprint declines dramatically and as we move towards a more sustainable and less conflict-causing way of living. And when we transfer resources to where they are most needed on the planet to support development, the poor win too. For a more formal version of this mechanism, see here, section 11.


Why should we do this? Because a) the poor of the world desperately need our help and because b) the poor have for years been effectively subsidising the rich world’s “free lunch” – a binge on non-renewable resources over the last 150 years, which was apparently consequence–free, but turns out to have been in fact laden with consequences which are highly destructive. The poor have been subsidising the binge by simply being too poor to use any resources and yet it is the poor who will bear the brunt of the effects of the climate change which we have caused. There is a clear enough moral case for some form of reparation, our wealth has gone too far.


And our quality of life will increase because we will be doing the right thing.


Going beyond Aid, for a clear, comprehensive and deep overview of what is needed to solve the world’s food crisis, I invite you to look here. (The fact that it uses specifically Christian language at times makes it resonate more for people of faith, and I hope does not lessen its coherence for those of no faith.)






Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: