Tribunal upholds Commission's merger decision but orders changes
24 May 2012
The Charity Tribunal has upheld the Charity Commission’s decision to allow two independent schools in...
An independent watchdog for international development will soon be monitoring the results and impact of British overseas aid programmes, following the first major speech by the new international development secretary today.
Andrew Mitchell, (pictured), speaking at an Oxfam event this afternoon, announced “a fundamental change in direction” in aid spending by the Department for International Development.
The new secretary told those present that he has made moves to establish a watchdog to make sure aid spending is getting value for money, and introduced the UKAid Transparency Guarantee, which will see information about all the department’s spending made available on its website and to beneficiaries overseas.
“We need to focus on results and outcomes, not just inputs,” he said. “Aid spending decisions should be made on the basis of evidence, not guesswork.”
Mitchell said that aid spending generally represented good value for money, but vowed to prioritise efficiency and effectiveness in the future, arguing that the tight fiscal situation demands greater impact for aid investment. “Our aim is to spend every penny of every pound of [British taxpayer] money wisely and well. We want to squeeze every last ounce of value from it,” he said.
“In the future, when it comes to international development, we will want to see hard evidence of the impact your money makes.”
“Transparency, accountability, responsibility, fairness and empowerment will be our watchwords,” he added.
The minister said that the government plans to redirect £100m “from projects that are low-priority or that are not performing, to programmes that have a better success rate in improving the lives of the world’s poor”. The announcement comes two weeks after he declared an immediate freeze on £6.5m worth of ‘awareness’ projects, such as a Brazilian-style dance troupe in Hackney.
Today’s announcement of a new watchdog for the sector by the minister was met with applause from Oxfam, who hosted the event to launch its report, 21st Century aid – recognising success and tacking failure.
Oxfam chief executive Barbara Stocking said that the charity has been campaigning for a watchdog for years, but argued “the new watchdog must be truly independent of government if it is to achieve the best results for the British taxpayer and poor people alike”.
She said: “Strengthening transparency and accountability will be important in further improving the quality of British aid, but they should be pieces in a larger jigsaw.”
24 May 2012
The Charity Tribunal has upheld the Charity Commission’s decision to allow two independent schools in...
24 May 2012
The Department for Education has issued an invitation to tender for delivery of the National Citizen Service...
24 May 2012
The Charity Law Association has recommended trustees are given the legal freedom to invest on a total...
24 May 2012
The Charity Tribunal has upheld the Charity Commission’s decision to allow two independent schools in...
24 May 2012
A consultation launched by the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills has been criticised for...
24 May 2012
Missing People is hoping to track down missing children using Twitter.
24 May 2012
Charities are being urged to abandon balloon releases in a Twitter a campaign.
24 May 2012
Missing People is hoping to track down missing children using Twitter.
21 May 2012
Marie Curie Cancer Care has officially opened its new national support centre in Pontypool, Wales, creating...
15 Oct 2012
15 Oct 2012
15 Oct 2012
19 Nov 2012
Anon
Fundraiser
RNS
3 Jun 2010
At last! Long overdue, but especially important and probably unavoidable given the state of the public finances.
I know you shouldn't speak ill of the previous administration, but they had budgeted and were in the process of spending "£6.5m worth of ‘awareness’ projects, such as a Brazilian-style dance troupe in Hackney." Really? In our name? Goodness, money must have been cheap in those days.
[Reply]