[g8-sheffield] Inside the Murky World of Make Poverty History
zerosevenfour two
zerosevenfourtwo at hotmail.co.uk
Wed Jun 29 12:49:44 BST 2005
a must read
http://indymedia.org.uk/en/2005/06/315058.html
Make Poverty History would seem an unprecedented success story. Uniting
trade unions, charities, NGOs and a stellar-cast of celebrities, its cause
is dominating media coverage while the campaign's white wristband is being
worn the world over. So why, as the G8 summit approaches, are leading
members briefing against each other to the press and African social
movements saying nothing about us, without us'? Stuart Hodkinson
investigates.
For a sun-soaked Friday in late May, there was an unusual air of panic at
the British Trade Union Congress (TUC) for the monthly members' assembly of
Make Poverty History (MPH). Officials hurriedly briefed reception with some
last-minute security instructions: You must make sure that only assembly
members are let in, one instructed. The meeting is open to the public, but
only public members of Make Poverty History.
The nerves were understandable. Two damning stories about MPH were about to
break in the British national press. The cover story of British centre-left
weekly, New Statesman, Why Oxfam is failing Africa', had exposed deep anger
among members of the MPH coalition at Oxfam's revolving door' relationship
with UK government officials and policies, accusing it of allowing Britain's
two most powerful politicians, Prime Minister Tony Blair and Chancellor
Gordon Brown, to co-opt MPH as a front for New Labour's own questionable
anti-poverty drive.
The right-wing Sunday Telegraph, meanwhile, had given notice of its shocking
exclusive on how large numbers of the ubiquitous MPH white wristband the
very symbol of the campaign had been knowingly sourced from Chinese
sweatshops with Oxfam's blessing.
Inside MPH, however, the embarrassing revelations were no surprise. For the
past six months, some of the UK 's leading development and environmental
NGOs have been increasingly vocal in their unease about a campaign high on
celebrity octane but low on radical politics. One insider, active in a key
MPH working group, argues there has often been a complete divergence
between the democratically agreed message of our public campaign and the
actual spin that greets the outside world. He is angry:
Our real demands on trade, aid and debt, and criticisms of UK government
policy in developing countries have been consistently swallowed up by white
bands, celebrity luvvies and praise upon praise for Blair and Brown being
ahead of other world leaders on these issues.
THE RISE AND RISE OF MPH
This is surely not what campaigners had in mind back in late 2003 when Oxfam
initiated a series of informal meetings with charities and campaigning
organisations to consider forming an unprecedented coalition against poverty
in 2005 to coincide with the UK presidency of both the G8 summit and EU, the
first five year evaluation of progress on the UN Millennium Development
Goals (MDGs) agreed in 2000, the 6th WTO Ministerial Meeting in Hong Kong,
and the 20th anniversary of Live Aid.
In September 2004, the Make Poverty History coalition was officially
launched as the UK mobilisation of an international coalition, the Global
Call to Action Against Poverty (G-CAP), led by Oxfam International, Action
Aid and DATA the controversial Africa charity set up by U2 frontman, Bono
and multi-billionnaires, George Soros, and Microsoft's Bill Gates, the
world's second richest person with a fortune of just under $50 billion.
Since then, MPH has become an impressive campaigning coalition, boasting
over 460 member organisations including all the major trade unions and the
TUC, development NGOs, charities, churches as well as several faith and
diaspora groups. Its successful mix of celebrity backers and anti-poverty
message has captured the attention of both politicians and mass media,
encapsulated in the near-hysteria following the annoucement by veteran rock
star and Africa campaigner, Bob Geldof, that a series of free concerts in
London, Paris, Philadelphia, Rome, and Berlin would take place under the
banner Live 8' to coincide with the MPH campaign to lobby the G8 summit in
Gleneagles, Scotland in July.
But despite the success, there is widespread unhappiness within the
coalition over the campaign's public face and its cosiness to Blair and
Brown. Critics argue that on paper at least, MPH's policy demands on the UK
government are fairly radical, especially its calls for trade justice not
free trade, which would require G8 and EU countries, notably the UK, to
stop forcing through free market policies on poor countries as part of aid,
trade deals or debt relief. MPH also says rich countries should immediately
double aid by $50bn per year and finally meet 35-year old promises to spend
0.7 per cent of their national income in development aid. More and better
aid, meanwhile, should be matched by cancellation of the unpayabale debts
of the world's poorest countries through a fair and transparent
international process that uses new money, not slashed aid budgets. With
additional calls for the regulation of multinationals and the
democratisation of the IMF and World Bank, John Hilary, Campaigns Director
of UK development NGO, War on Want, has a point when he asserts that MPH's
policies strike at the very heart of the neo-liberal agenda.
The problem, however, is that when these policies are relayed to a public
audience, they become virtually indistinguishable from those of the UK
government. This was brought home back in March this year when Blair's
deeply compromised Commission for Africa set out its neo-liberal proposals
for the corporate plunder of Africa's human and natural resources under the
identical headlines used by MPH trade justice', drop the debt' and more
and better aid'. In return, most MPH members, led by Oxfam and the TUC,
warmly welcomed the report's recommendations. As Ghana 's Yao Graham makes
clear in July's Red Pepper, African civil society is far less enamoured with
the Commission's report, which he argues lays out a blueprint for the new
scramble for Africa .
REVOLVING DOORS
Thanks to the New Statesman exposé, much of the blame is placed on the
leadership of Oxfam the UK 's biggest and most powerful development
agency. Despite its pro-poor image around the world, over the last two
decades, Oxfam has become a feeder school for government special advisers
and World Bank officials and has a particularly close relationship with New
Labour. Blair's special advisor on international development, Justin
Forsyth, was previously Oxfam's campaigns manager. Forsyth's opposite number
at the Treasury is Oxfam board member, Shriti Vadera, a former director at
the US bank, UBS Warburg, and specialist in public-private partnerships, a
policy that litters the Africa Commission's report. Less well known is John
Clark, who left Oxfam for the World Bank in 1992 to join the World Bank
where he was responsible for the Bank's co-optation strategy with civil
society before advising Tony Blair in 2000 on his Africa Partnership
Initiative that directly led to the New Partnership for Africa 's
Development (NEPAD) in 2001. At the heart of MPH is Oxfam's Sarah Kline, a
former World Bank official who champions the organisation's constructive
dialogue' approach with the IMF and World Bank.
Oxfam's political independence from neo-liberal governance is also
compromised by the £40m or so of its annual income that comes from
government or other public funds. Nearly £14m alone originates from the
Department for International Development (DfID), which is a major champion
of privatisation and its benefits for UK companies in developing countries.
In this, Oxfam is of course by no means alone almost every development NGO
in Britain is on DfID's payroll. While it is possible to take and use
government money progressively while being critical of the donor's policies,
such large amounts of government funding inevitably influence how far Oxfam
will stick its neck out politically and risk future funding cuts.
Oxfam's unrivalled financial resources and existing public profile make it
by far the most powerful organisation in the MPH coalition. Last year,
Oxfam's annual income surpassed £180m three times the amount received by
its nearest rival, Christian Aid, and dwarfing more social movement-oriented
development NGOs like WDM and War on Want who punch way above their weight
on just over £1m each. Such wealth disparity inevitably translates into the
direction taken by the coalition, especially its public image. Oxfam's army
of press officers, researchers and campaign officers can naturally take
advantage of the huge media opportunities generated by the campaign.
But making Oxfam the scapegoat for MPH's co-optation by New Labour misses
the key role played by Comic Relief and its celebrity co-founder, the film
director, Richard Curtis. As one of Britain's most prolific and brilliant
comedy writers, Curtis shot to fame in the 1980s with the TV series
Blackadder, and his since penned hits like Mr Bean, The Vicar of Dibley, and
the blockbuster movie, Four Weddings and a Funeral. With wealth and fame has
come enormous political clout. In 2001, British centre-left daily
broadsheet, The Guardian, ranked him the 10th most powerful person in the UK
media industry, ahead of every national newspaper editor, except Paul Dacre
of the Daily Mail.
Curtis's personal commitment to raising money for Africa goes back to 1985
when, at the height of the Ethiopian famine, he visited refugee camps as a
guest of Oxfam. It was a life-changing experience and on his return to
London persuaded showbiz friends to set up Comic Relief, the celebrity-led
charity that uses the medium of comedy to raise both awareness about
poverty, famine and disease in Africa , and huge sums of money to such
causes.
Despite its incredible success in bringing in the bacon over £337m since
its inception Comic Relief's live televised shows every two years are also
criticised for their distinct lack of politics and inaccurate portrayal of
Africa as a continent-come-country ravaged by natural disasters and warring
tribes the roles of colonialism, IMF and World Bank structural adjustment
programmes and Western corporations don't get a look in.
THE MPH MEDIA MACHINE
Comic Relief's apolitical approach to Africa is deeply important to the
fractious debate inside MPH. For while Bono and Geldof get the limelight and
Oxfam dominates the policy agenda, it is Richard Curtis who is in the
driving seat of MPH's all-important publicity machine.
Curtis's power partly lies in the financial and human resources he brings to
the campaign. He has personally ensured the bankrolling of MPH, convincing
Scottish multi-millionaire business tycoon, Sir Tom Hunter, to donate a £1m
to the campaign, and advertising executives to donate more than £4m of free
airtime. This helped propel his Click' advert worldwide in which global
film and music mega-stars, like George Clooney, Bono and Kylie Minogue,
kitted out in full white T-shirt and wristband regalia, click their fingers
every three seconds to mark another child dying in Africa . Curtis has used
his unrivalled celebrity address book to ensure that MPH's platforms, events
and entire PR strategy are dripping with celebrities.
While most MPH members gratefully accept that Curtis's celebrity support has
been integral to the campaign's phenomenal marketing success (sales of the
MPH white wristband are nearly 4 million and the website gets thousands of
hits a minute), some believe it has come with too heavy a price. First
there's the dubious role of Sir Tom Hunter, no ordinary sharp-dressed
philanthropist. Worth £678m, his Hunter Foundation charity is an evangelical
force behind public-private partnerships and child entrepreneurism in
Scotland . Since 2001, it has helped fund the Scottish Executive's Schools
Enterprise Programme in which the private sector helps groom children as
young as five in the wonders of business.
Ewan Hunter, CEO of The Hunter Foundation, rejects this characterisation of
the scheme as completely erroneous, and claims it is a world leading
initiative to support a can do attitude in children: For the record we
consult widely with the relevant trade unions, councils, governments,
teachers and children before agreeing any investment in education. Note he
doesn't actually refute the business-child relationship.
Tom Hunter recently caused a storm even in the right-wing tabloid press when
he began selling special edition charity Live 8-MPH white wristbands stamped
with the logos of six global fashion brands, including Hilfiger Denim whose
owner, Tommy Hilfiger Corporation, is accused by labour right campaigners of
sourcing its clothes from anti-union sweatshops in Latin America and the
East Asia.
According to Stephen Coats, Executive Director of the Chicago-based US/Labor
Education in the Americas Project that monitors and supports the basic
rights of workers in Latin America, Hilfiger's labour record falls short of
minimum standards:
In our experience, Tommy Hilfiger is at the bottom of the list in
demonstrating refusal to accept responsibility for the way workers are
treated.
Back in October 2003, the company was accused by labour rights campaigners
of cutting and running from its responsibilities to workers when evidence
was uncovered of labour abuses at the Tarrant blue jean factory in Ajalpan ,
Mexico .
The revelations have once again left Make Poverty History campaigners angry
at the contamination of their high-profile symbol by its association with
anti-labour companies. War on Want's John Hilary speaks for many inside MPH
when he says that unless Hilfiger had suddenly reformed without them knowing
it's not the sort of company we'd want to be associated with.
Then there's Abbot Mead Vickers (AMV), the UK 's largest advertising agency
that has previously worked for Comic Relief and has been brought in to help
with the campaign's communication strategy. Among AMV's many politically
incorrect' proposals rejected by incensed MPH members was a high-profile
billboard campaign in which images of Ghandi and Nelson Mandela would sit
alongside Gordon Brown, with the caption 2005
?'. The ad's message was
clear: this could be the year in which Brown himself becomes a man of
history', cajoling the G8 into the ultimate sacrifice of dropping Africa 's
debt to take his place alongside two martyrs of anti-colonialism.
Unsurprisingly, this ridiculous proposal to draw an equivalence between
those whose lives were dedicated to fighting white supremacist imperialism,
and a man who wants to turn Africa into a giant free trade zone on behalf of
Western multinationals, was blocked by several incensed Make Poverty History
members. But such insensitivity comes with the turf: AMV's corporate clients
not only include Pepsi Cola, Pfizer, Sainsbury, Camelot, and the Economist
but also, ironically, Diageo, the drinks multinational which happens to own
the Gleneagles Hotel where the G8 leaders will be meeting, and is a major
investor in Africa.
According to Lucy Michaels from UK-based research and campaigning
organisation, Corporate Watch, Diageo has a track record of lobbying OECD
and G8 countries to push for greater investment liberalisation in developing
countries and its PR activities in Africa are deeply controversial:
Diageo aggressively promotes its products in Africa by attacking one the
continent's key micro-scale industries home brewing. It recently released
its 'Corporate Citizenship Report for East Africa' in which it labelled
unbranded alcohol as posing severe 'health and social risks', despite
evidence from the International Centre of Alcohol Policies, incidentally
funded by Diageo, that 'illicit' brew' is generally of good quality and is
vital to the household and local economy.
SANITISING MPH'S MESSAGE
But the most destructive aspect of Curtis's involvement, critics argue, has
been his personal intervention in the public communications of MPH to ensure
that the politics are routinely buried by the personality as part of his own
personal and completely unaccountable strategy to change G8 policy:
Richard's philosophy has become painfully obvious to everyone in MPH, one
critic argues. He believes that we should support the efforts of the UK
government to bring other G8 countries into its line on aid and debt, and is
adamant that Brown and Blair should not be criticised.
A few months ago, tensions came to a head when members challenged the
discrepancy between MPH's agreed position and the campaign's pro-government
public face. The response from a key Comic Relief official was that Curtis
found it difficult to turn against the government because of his personal
friendship with Gordon Brown. The extent of the Curtis-Brown relationship
was revealed on primetime national television on Saturday 25 June in
Curtis's BBC 1 film, The Girl in the Café (bizarrely announced as being
shown across Africa ).
A love story between Gina, an idealistic young campaigner, and Lawrence, an
adviser to a tough but caring Gordon Brown-style Chancellor, who helps his
new lover get an audience with world leaders at a pretend G8 summit in
Iceland and inspires the UK government to insist on making poverty
history'. Brown even attended the Scottish première of the film in May at an
event organised by MPH paymaster, Tom Hunter, who has since been knighted in
the Queen's Birthday Honours List.
Against this background, it is little wonder that a number of NGOs in MPH
have recently felt forced to try to undermine the Oxfam-Curtis-Brown axis by
making their displeasure known to the press. The ensuing fall out led to MPH
members agreeing to quickly distance the coalition from the government by
rushing forward by several weeks a report criticising UK government policy.
However, the respite was only temporary. The coup de grâce came in a recent
announcement that Gordon Brown has been invited to the 2 July rally in
Edinburgh .
Frustration would not perhaps be so intense if there was real pluralism and
democracy in MPH's organising practices. But as the G8 draws near, MPH
apparatchiks have gone to extraordinary lengths to ensure that come the 2
July rally in Edinburgh , only the branded, monolithic message and speakers
of MPH are seen and heard.
DON'T MENTION THE WAR
MPH's website fails to even acknowledge the other protests, events and
groups like Dissent, Trident Ploughshares and G8Alternatives, but who
themselves are actively encouraging everyone to go and support the MPH
rally. The MPH Coordinating Team, which includes Oxfam, Comic Relief and the
TUC, has also twice unanimously vetoed the Stop the War Coalition's (STWC)
application to join MPH on the Orwellian grounds that the issues of economic
justice and development are separate from that of war, and STWC's
participation in Edinburgh on 2 July would confuse the message. It will be
interesting, then, to see if Oxfam bans itself it is currently leading a
global campaign for an international arms treaty on the basis that
uncontrolled arms fuels poverty and suffering.
STWC has since been banned from even having a stall at the MPH rally. A
leaked email in late May to MPH from Milipedia, the ethical' events
management company helping to organise the MPH rally, asks the coalition to
consider the desirability / strategy for removing people from our event who
are setting up unwanted stalls, ad hoc events, facilities etc and to draw
up a list of the likely infiltrators and decide what we're prepared to
tolerate and at what point we draw the line and what action we want to
take. This followed a tip-off that the Socialist Party (formerly Militant
Tendency) is planning to sell its newspaper on the Edinburgh rally, shout
slogans through megaphones and wear red MakeCapitalismHistory T-shirts and
wristbands (Red Pepper, incidentally, will be wearing Make the G8 History'
T-shirts on the day).
The email also recounts how, in response to Stop the War's announced
intention to lead a break away rally at 4.30pm on 2 July, the local council,
the police and MPH organisers are working together to ensure that STWC would
be denied their own stage in order to retain our ownership of the event and
our key messaging.
This is not just about political domination. Part of MPH's concern lies in
the perceived threat to its monopoly of all commercial trade taking place on
the day the coalition has taken out a market traders licence for the 2
July that will solely benefit the coalition's members and empowers MPH to
move illegal traders, including political activists, off the site. Comic
Relief has also registered the MakePovertyHistory slogan as a trademark with
the European Union and is threatening to take action against any misuse or
alleged of the Trademark.
But concerns about MPH lie much deeper than the political divisions within
the UK development scene. The most obvious question, increasingly on the
lips of even mainstream journalists, is where are the voices of African
civil society, and other social movements of the Global South, in a campaign
that is supposedly about them?
NOTHING ABOUT US, WITHOUT US
Kofi Maluwi Klu, a leading Ghanaian Pan-African activist and international
coordinator of Jubilee 2000 Africa Campaign in the late 1990s, is angered by
MPH's lack of representativeness: We have a saying in the African
liberation movement nothing about us, without us'. Make Poverty History
is a massive step backwards in this regard, even from Jubilee 2000.The
campaign is overwhelmingly led by Northern NGOs and its basic message is
about white millionaire popstars saving Africa 's helpless. The political
movements still fighting for liberation on the ground are completely
erased.
The absence of the South in the leadership of MPH inevitably translates into
the campaign's politics. For instance, Southern NGO's and movements are
generally critical of making demands on the G8: The G8 is a completely
illegitimate and unnaccountable body of global governance; its governments
and corporations are historically responsible for most of the problems of
developing countries, and remain so today say Nicola Bullard , of the
Bangkok-based Focus on the Global South, the respected international
non-government policy research and advocacy organisation. Lobbying the G8
contradicts the very clear call made by hundreds of social movements, NGOs
and trade unions from the South and the North at this year's World Social
Forum to mobilise protests against the G8 summit.
The same is true for MPH's policy demands. While Southern movements welcome
MPH's more holistic development agenda to Jubilee 2000's single issue
campaign for debt relief, they argue that its position on debt contradicts
what grassroots African and other Southern campaigners are demanding: MPH
is calling for 100 per cent cancellation of the unpayable debts of the
poorest countries but so is the UK government, explains Jubilee South's
Brian Ashley. This does not address the illegitimacy of the debt' in the
first place, the fact that many South countries' debts were either a
hangover from colonialism or came from the huge hike in interest rates
during the 1970s and 80s, and have been paid back many times over, making
the South the creditor of the North. We demand the total, unconditional and
immediate cancellation of all Southern country debts, not just those of the
very poorest as MPH requests.
For Southern debt campaigners, the debate is almost identical to the one
that led back in 1999, to the North-South split in the Jubilee 2000 movement
and the creation of the Jubilee South network, which today brings together
more than 80 debt campaigns, social movements and peoples' organisations
from more than 40 countries across Latin America, the Caribbean, Africa and
Asia/Pacific. Jubilee South's founding principle was to create stronger
South-South solidarity, to strengthen the collective voice, presence and
leadership of the South in the international debt movement and lay the basis
for global social transformation from the bottom-up.
While MPH is part of the Global Call for Action on Poverty (G-CAP) that has
a Southern dimension in its leadership, dozens of Southern-based groups,
including Jubilee South and Focus on the Global South, have refused to be
part of G-CAP, declining's Oxfam and Action Aid's invitation to the
September 2004 Johannesburg meeting that eventually launched the coalition.
Jubilee South decided not to go for the fairly simple reason that you don't
launch a campaign on behalf of the South without fully briefing, consulting
and working with Southern networks first, says Brian Ashley. Nicola Bullard
concurs, adding: Focus on the Global South saw the Jo'burg meeting as a way
to get a lot of radical groups and grassroots movements to give legitimacy
to a pre-determined, Northern-led campaign. We believe you have to mobilise
and construct movements from the bottom-up.
Perhaps the most dangerous aspect of MPH's blending of its message with that
of the government's, and its exclusion of critics North and South, is that
it enables the state and media to draw a sharp line in the sand between the
good protester' attending the 2 July Edinburgh rally, and the bad
protester' anyone who is contemplating engaging in civil disobedience
against what is, after all, an illegitimate institution and set of
governments responsible for the deaths of millions of innocent people each
year.
THE MPH MONEY MACHINE
Those UK development NGOs unhappy with MPH's direction know this only too
well, but refuse to publicly walk away from a campaign that is actively
derailing the global justice movement. Although it may sound cynical, the
reason is simple: MPHistory is a money-spinner. Although we hate the
message and the corporate branding, some NGOs are making thousands of pounds
through the wristbands, one arch critic admitted. We have loads of new
people on our database interested in our campaigns, and because the issues
of trade, debt and aid are now suddenly sexy again, we have new funding
bodies approaching us to do projects and research. MPH is paying for my job
for the next three years.
This, at the end of the day, is the NGO bottom-line and that is what
MPHistory is all about helping the world's poor in ways that guarantee
your own organisational survival. By riding the MPH money-spinning tiger in
the hope of becoming stronger, the UK's most respected development NGOs like
Christian Aid, War on War and World Development Movement, are themselves in
danger of becoming completely detached from their African comrades at a
crucial time for unity against the New labour, the G8 and their plan to
carve up Africa's natural wealth for Western corporations.
This must not be allowed to happen. It is still not too late for Make
Poverty History's dissenting voices to quit en masse and use this symbolic
power to inspire the millions of Make Poverty History members to resist the
G8, and push Geldof, Bono, Curtis and co to at least use their media
influence to criticise G8 policy. Otherwise, the only thing they are likely
to be consigning to history is Africa itself.
* Stuart Hodkinson is the Associate Editor of Red Pepper
_________________________________________________________________
Use MSN Messenger to send music and pics to your friends
http://messenger.msn.co.uk
More information about the g8-sheffield
mailing list