G8 leaders make ready to drop aid commitments

June 30, 2008 | by Alex Evans | More on Africa, Economics and development | One comment

Someone’s leaked a copy of the draft G8 communique to the FT (or, more specifically, to their Berlin correspondent - presumably no prizes for guessing which government the leak came from, then).  According to Hugh Williamson, the draft

…shows leaders will commit to fulfilling “our commitments on [development aid] made at Gleneagles” – but fails to cite the target of $25bn annually by 2010. 

 He continues:

In a further retreat, the G8 is set to abandon its Gleneagles promise to provide universal access to Aids treatment and prevention by 2010. The pledge has been a benchmark around which health campaigners and others have been organising their work, especially in Africa. The draft says the G8 will continue “working towards the goal of universal access to HIV/Aids prevention, treatment care” but it does not mention the 2010 deadline.

Oh dear - although it’s been obvious for a while that the G8 was sliding way, way off track for universal treatment by 2010.  In the background, there’s the unpalatable fact that Africa’s still off track for all of the MDGs, in spite of all the talk of Calls to Action and so forth.

Related posts

1. Good riddance
2. Will the real leaders’ summit process please stand up?
3. Thabo Mbeki: guilty of manslaughter
4. More on cash incentives for AIDS prevention
5. Geldof slams ‘poor, sad Italy’

One comment »

1. Dave on June 30th, 2008 at 12:37 pm:
   

   Thank you yet again GlobalDashboard for shedding light on the breaking news… though for once I think you’ve missed a trick, namely the line in the FT article that says:

   “The draft communiqué, dated June 25, might still change, diplomats insisted, especially if pressure from African countries or from the public grew next week.”

   Now this may be misplaced youthful optimism, but shouldn’t we at least try to contribute to this “pressure”? Writing to newspapers, needling politicians, tattooing bald men’s heads and so on? Because it seems that’s what the leaker (?) was aiming at, and quite rightly so…