Tag: Speeches

Below is the text of the speech made by Alan Duncan, the Minister of State for International Development, on 7th April 2014.

I am delighted to be here today to support the UK launch of this year’s Education for All Global Monitoring Report. Its theme, Teaching and Learning: Achieving Quality For All fits well with DFID’s education priorities. The report also rightly reminds us why investing in education is so important for any economy as a whole but also, and more importantly, why it matters for every individual.

Behind this report is 1 simple stark truth. If all girls completed primary school in sub-Saharan Africa and South and West Asia, the number of girls getting married by the age of 15 would fall significantly. Education does indeed transform lives.

In these brief remarks, I want to reflect on what the GMR tells us about DFID’s 3 education priorities, and then outline where more effort is needed to make better and faster progress. ‘Leaving no one behind’ is 1 of DFID’s priorities and this report presents impressive progress over the last 20 years on access to school. Globally there are 51 million more children in primary school today than there were in 1999, and 6 out of 10 countries have now achieved an equal number of girls and boys enrolled in primary school.

These are signs of real improvement which is the result of significant domestic and international investment and effort. Good progress can be made when the world gets behind a simple and compelling message as it has done with the MDG focus on access to primary school.

While we should recognise and celebrate this progress, we know that schooling does not always lead to learning. I don’t think any of us here would be satisfied with a primary school in which our children do not even learn to read and to count after four years in school. It’s the quality of learning achieved for every girl and boy, and not just the length of schooling, which makes education such a valuable investment.

Yet one of the headline messages from this GMR is that there are an estimated 250 million children – that’s 1 in 3 – who are not learning basic reading and numeracy skills, even though at least half of them have spent those crucial four years in school. Global data on learning is currently patchy but this estimate is alarming.

Improving learning is at the heart of DFID’s work on education. More recent work by the GMR team suggests that practical progress on actual learning is being made. A further 17 million children in sub-Saharan Africa are now learning the basics compared with the number just over 10 years ago.

So improving learning and leaving no one behind: The third priority is the focus on girls. Educating girls improves their ability to choose when to get married and how many children they have, and it gives them greater control over their assets and income. Most importantly it gives them control over their own body. But despite progress, there are still over 60 countries which have not achieved gender parity in primary school.

The UK government has committed to support up to 1 million marginalised girls through our Girls’ Education Challenge. DFID’s focus is on keeping girls in school, supporting them to learn, and ensuring their critical transition from primary to secondary school.

The Prime Minister will be highlighting some of the specific challenges faced by girls, including early marriage, violence, and female genital mutilation, at a special event in July.

So, looking to the future, what do we need to do to ensure we make better and faster progress beyond 2015?

DFID has rightly defined economic development as a central pillar of its development strategy. We know that economic growth can help lift people out of poverty and we also know the importance of education to achieve this. Along with our support for quality basic education, DFID is stepping up its efforts to look at the transition from school to work, including targeted support to upper secondary, higher education and skills programmes.

Improving learning and reaching the most marginalised children means working in difficult environments with new partners and targeting support to those who need it most.

This is why DFID continues to prioritise support to conflict-affected countries and why we have recently made new commitments to reach some of the most marginalised groups, including those with disabilities, and those affected by the crisis in Syria.

But to develop the right policies, to ensure that no one is left behind, that all girls and boys are learning when in school, and that we are training people for the right jobs that the country needs, we need to gather good data and analysis.

The UK government is doing its part by investing in improved data and research. In Pakistan and East Africa, DFID is supporting household surveys which allow parents to provide immediate feedback on the quality of education their children are receiving. DFID is also working closely with the UK research community to look at how to improve the quality and effectiveness of teaching, in order to deliver faster progress.

The analysis provided by the Global Monitoring Report is why it is such an important resource for the education community and why the UK government is proud to be one of its major supporters. Building on the achievements of this Report, we congratulate, and look forward to working with, the newly appointed Director, Dr Aaron Benavot, to ensure its continued success.

With the replenishment of the Global Partnership for Education coming up in June and the ongoing negotiations on a post-2015 development framework, this is an important year for education. Future generations depend on the decisions we make today. The Global Monitoring Report is an excellent resource to help us make the right decisions to ensure that everyone gets a chance to realise their potential.

The success of the MDGs is down, in large part, to their simplicity. Plain, simple language and a compelling message on education is what is needed after 2015. The education community, above all others, should be setting the benchmark for this. I will be watching you.

Thank you.

Below is the text of the speech made by the International Development Minister, Alan Duncan, made at the International Institute for Strategic Studies on 17th May 2012.

Every country has the right to defend itself. Indeed, it is the first duty of government to protect its citizens.

Over the last few decades, global efforts to prevent and reduce violent conflict and civil wars have grown and strengthened. International peace operations – often based on new alliances between the North and the South – have played a vital role in bringing stability to fragile states. But for many countries, conflict and instability remain intractable problems, fuelled by the unregulated and irresponsible trade in arms.

This year, the world faces a new opportunity to prevent and reduce violent conflict as nations come together in New York in July to try to conclude negotiations on a new arms trade treaty.

Over the last forty years there have been many negotiations dealing with aspects of arms and defence. There were the series of negotiations aimed at reducing the bloated armouries built up during the cold war. There were then a series of nuclear anti-proliferation discussions. More recently there have been conventions that have addressed specific aspects of the arms trade, such as the Ottawa Convention that bans the sale of landmines, or the UN Programme of Action on the Illicit Trade of Small Arms and Light Weapons. The latter has commendable aims and has begun to address the problem of small arms and light weapons but is limited in its focus, is non-binding, and has been hampered by disagreement.

Through the Arms Trade Treaty we now have the chance to agree a mechanism which comprehensively regulates the trade in all conventional weapons, big and small.

This is a development issue just as much as it is security issue. Without security, children cannot go to school, hospitals cannot function, farming cannot take place and commerce cannot thrive.

In short, violent conflict and insecurity engrain poverty. They threaten our chances of setting this world on a path to peace and prosperity. We have witnessed time and time again conflict and violence being fuelled by the illicit trade in weapons. It is the small arms – the guns and rifles – that have empowered armed groups, and which have escalated armed violence, resulting in millions of deaths.

The illegal trade in arms costs lives and blights futures

More than 740,000 men, women, and children die each year as a result of armed violence. Two thirds of these deaths occur in countries that are not in conflict. What does this show us? It shows us that easy access to portable weapons is a major factor in causing these deaths.

This Government is determined to do everything within its power to make sure that the most rigorous international standards are applied to the export of, and trade in, arms. It is the only way to stop weapons falling into the wrong hands.

Britain already operates one of the strongest arms control systems in the world, demanding the highest standards from our defence industry so that we can be sure that we are not fuelling these dreadful trends.

It is encouraging to see that the world community is now planning to come together and agree legally binding, international high standards for the trade and transfer of arms. Internationally, there is now a strong will to make an Arms Trade Treaty a reality.

The UK has been promoting the Arms Trade Treaty from the outset. The UK introduced the initial Resolution in the UN in December 2006 calling for an Arms Trade Treaty. The Resolution was co-authored with six countries: Australia, Argentina Costa Rica, Finland, Kenya and Japan. Negotiations began in 2010 and the final Negotiating Conference will be in July this year.

The Foreign and Commonwealth Office will be leading the negotiations and the Departments for International Development, Defence, and Business Innovation and Skills will be represented on the delegation.

Achieving consensus by the end of the Negotiating Conference on a Treaty text which meets our objectives will be challenging. However, we are very determined and will make every effort to attain this goal. Between now and July, the UK Government will be working to raise the profile of and support for this Treaty. We will be working with our counterparts across the world to bring them on board. We will be demonstrating to our public why we believe this is so important.

I want today to explain just why we feel so strongly about this and why we are pushing for global standards.

First I would like to examine the scale of the problem. Second I want to look at how unregulated arms transfers affect development.  Third I would like to offer some thoughts as to what an arms treaty should look like.

Why do we need a Treaty?

Currently a variable patchwork of regulation exists across the world. Some Governments have very robust arms trade control systems in place, but other Governments are fuelling the illicit and irresponsible trade in arms by not having any control systems at all, or by only having weak systems. Overall, there are no common international standards for the arms trade. This results in gaps and loopholes which can be exploited.

So, first, let’s look in a bit more detail at the impact of unregulated and irresponsible arms sales.

Every year, armed violence kills nearly three quarters of a million  people. To pick a few examples:

In the Democratic Republic of Congo, close to 4 million people have died in armed conflict over the last decade.

In Nepal, ten years of conflict has left more than 12,000 people dead and hundreds of thousands displaced.

In 2011 an estimated 70,000 people were displaced from eastern Darfur in a wave of ethnically targeted attacks.

Corrupt or irresponsible dealers are selling and diverting weapons into war zones, fuelling conflict.

For example, in Uganda armed groups are known to have previously operated surreptitiously to obtain weapons from Sudan – these weapons ultimately led to an enormous cost in human life. The suffering caused by the illicit market in arms was immense. In Uganda, at least 23,000 children and adults were abducted by the Lord Resistance Army, the LRA. Young boys were trained as child soldiers. Young girls were taken to work as slaves, while others were raped and abandoned. Some children have been killed or injured in cross-fire, armed attacks and cattle raids.

In Sudan, a similar picture emerges. Women and children are the most vulnerable in Sudan’s internal conflict. Not only are they caught in the crossfire of conflict, but they are targets of inter-community raids. They are most affected by a lack of access to clean water, food, healthcare and education in areas where conflict persists.

The groups who perpetrated these atrocities would not have been able to operate without access to a constant source of weapons and ammunition. Just because a weapon is small and light does not mean it is not a vicious driver of conflict and suffering.

Easily transported, small arms and light weapons account for an estimated 60 to 90% of conflict deaths as well as tens of thousands of additional deaths outside actual war zones.  It is estimated that more than 95 per cent of small arms in Africa, for example, come from outside the continent.

Another example is Yemen, where 60% of families report ownership of weapons. With approximately 10 million small arms for a population of 23 million people, Yemen is considered among the most heavily armed countries on earth.

The availability of weapons in Yemen is frequently linked to the rapid escalation of armed violence, as witnessed during the instability sparked by the Arab Spring, and to the aggravation of disputes over land and water resources, in which up to 4,000 people are reported to die every year. The end effect is hindrance to the county’s development in both rural and urban areas.

I believe an Arms Trade Treaty can make a major contribution to reducing and preventing this sort of conflict.  It will make it much harder for armed groups and governments that commit human rights abuses to acquire a ready flow of arms.

As if violent conflict was not bad enough in itself, it also has a significant bearing on a country’s potential for development.

It is clear that armed conflict and armed violence prevent countries from benefitting from the social and economic development they might otherwise enjoy. The internationally agreed Millennium Development Goals range from halving extreme poverty to halting the spread of HIV/AIDS and providing universal primary education, all by the target date of 2015. While progress is being made in areas such as the fight against communicable diseases, conflict has now become one of the greatest enemies of development.

About two thirds of the countries least likely to achieve the MDGs are in the midst of – or emerging from – conflict.

Even when conflict is simmering and not quite exploding, how can governments provide universal health care or primary education when their budgets are being diverted to corrupt or irresponsible arms purchases?

There is no way a State can build up a comprehensive health system when there is no stability and security and where they are being forced to address the challenges of bloodshed and injury caused by armed violence ahead of other healthcare demands.

How can a State provide universal primary education when armed violence is preventing or deterring children and teachers from simply getting to school?

Economic growth is the route out of poverty but violence and conflict is a fast route back into it. It is estimated that each year Africa foregoes wealth creation to the sum of 18 billion US dollars, as a result of armed conflict.

Vulnerable hit hardest

Make no mistake, the irresponsible trade in arms hits the most vulnerable the hardest.

Of course, the problems do not stop when the fighting stops. Taking the experience of many countries which have faced conflict, it takes 20 years for an economy to recover after the actual conflict has ended.

To understand this picture fully we have to ask what is driving this phenomenon.

At one level, the defence business is one of the most technologically pioneering and inventive sectors of industry. But we have to be honest – in addition to the legitimate arms business, the arms trade is subject to some of the most unscrupulous, greedy and immoral practices of any industry. So many times we have heard of arms dealers who are criminals, selling illicitly, and often getting away with it. A recent example is that of the Viktor Bout, convicted on terrorism charges after being accused of planning to smuggle arms to the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC). It has been reported that over many years Bout supplied arms to some of the most brutal regimes and civil wars of the last two decades. We can’t allow this to continue in an unregulated, tacitly authorised way.

There are many defence companies and States – those with good controls and good practices – who support an Arms Trade Treaty.  The Treaty will establish a fair and equitable foundation for legitimate arms trading.

I am today appealing for all countries to push for an Arms Trade Treaty, so we can ensure that no more arms deals take place outside a framework of global standards.

What could the Arms Trade Treaty look like?

So let me now turn to what an Arms Trade Treaty could look like.

An International Arms Trade Treaty will ensure the global trade in arms is subject to high standards. The Treaty will be a legally binding agreement, supported by monitoring and reporting mechanisms, that sets out very clear standards for arms transfers across international boundaries.

Before exporting arms, States will have to assess and consider an important list of criteria. This list must include the risk of the exported arms being used in human rights abuses, or to fuel conflict, the potential impact of the export on sustainable development, and the risk of the trade being subject to diversion or corrupt practices.

To be effective and worthwhile the treaty must be broad in scope, covering all elements from fighter jets to ammunition. Small arms and light weapons must be in the scope of the Treaty; if they are not, the opportunity to regulate a major contributor to conflict and suffering will have been missed. The UK, working hand in hand with most of the world’s developing nations, will push to ensure small arms and light weapons are in the scope of the Treaty. Leaving them out would be an act of negligence.

Under the terms of the Chair’s document and under the terms of the treaty we want, States will need to demonstrate transparency in their arms trade and they will be required to introduce reporting and transparency measures. This should include publishing a National export control list and detailed national reports on arms exports. States will also need to demonstrate their progress on implementing the Treaty requirements by submitting regular progress reports.  Reporting will enable our citizens to hold us to account for the arms transfers we make.

Corruption is a major problem in the arms trade. The unregulated, covert trade in arms, conducted by corrupt individuals or companies, leads to the diversion of weapons into the illicit market or to dangerous end-users. Corruption also undermines the ability of nations to ensure they are paying a fair and uninflated price for the weapons. Corruption allows individuals to profit from a nation’s pain with impunity.

I will push for the Arms Trade Treaty to address the issues of corruption, bribery and the lack of transparency that allow these practices to continue unnoticed. One of the ways I want the Treaty to do this is by including measures to control arms brokering.  This could be achieved by all States having a register of arms brokers. Such measures will close loopholes by ensuring brokers are accountable to the law wherever they are operating.  States will have to prosecute brokers and all other individuals involved in corrupt practices.

I believe the Treaty’s provisions must also recognise the impact of irresponsible and illegal arms transfers on the most vulnerable, including women.  Strong provisions on human rights will assist in this respect. However, considering the disproportionate impact armed violence has on women we also hope to see reference to this included in the Treaty’s preamble.

This is an ambitious project. Many States do not have export control systems at all and it will be a significant commitment for these States to establish systems which adhere to the strong standards of the Arms Trade Treaty. It will therefore be important that the international community recognises and responds to the need for international cooperation and assistance, including technical and financial assistance to countries which will need help in effectively implementing an Arms Trade Treaty.

The UK believes that this must be a strong, effective Treaty. However, we also realise that compromises will have to be made. Whilst many States are as supportive of a Treaty as we are, there are others who have their reservations. I will be working with international counterparts to try and overcome such doubts.

I am concerned that some do not see the value of having criteria on sustainable development in the Treaty, or they mistakenly interpret this as threatening developing States’ sovereignty, and their right to defend themselves and to spend their budgets as they see fit.

Others do not want ammunition or small arms and light weapons in the scope of the Treaty. I believe the inclusion of these weapons is critical.  If small arms and light weapons were not included in any agreement, it would dangerously undermine its impact.

In our view a country’s record and approach to human rights should determine whether or not it is a fitting buyer of weapons and we want to see this provision contained in the Treaty. I am concerned that some States are still resisting this inclusion.

Do not misunderstand me. We are encouraged to see the breadth of support that does exist for the Treaty. The EU, sub-Saharan Africa and much of the Caribbean are vocal supporters. The co-authors of the Treaty resolution are continually pushing for the most ambitious scope and provisions.

The P5 [five permanent members of the Security Council] have come a long way and issued a supportive statement last July. The majority of UN Member States want to see criteria regulating the export of arms, they want most conventional weapons in the scope, and they believe that States must retain some record of their arms transfers.

Meanwhile, UK civil society and industry are demonstrating their support, showing the world that all in the UK are united in their support for the Treaty.

Our opportunity

In July, all the States of the United Nations will meet in New York for four weeks of negotiations. The UK will be at the forefront of these negotiations, working hard to ensure the Conference ends with a robust Arms Trade Treaty which the majority of Nations will sign.

The UK fully believes in the value of such a Treaty and is determined to agree one which will achieve real change. We cannot have a Treaty that does not introduce legally binding regulations, or that does not include those weapons that are causing the most human suffering.

Let me stress, a treaty will not prevent any country from being able to defend itself. Indeed, a state’s security force, when properly trained and resourced, can play a valuable role in ensuring stability and creating a climate in which development can flourish.

An internationally agreed treaty will, however, close loopholes and gaps in legislation and it will ensure that globally high standards are in place to prevent irresponsible arms transfers taking place. It is long overdue.

Let no one be in any doubt about our determination. I hope that all countries will share our view.

The world will be watching to see who refuses to sign up to the Arms Trade Treaty.

Below is the text of the speech made by Alan Duncan, the then Minister of State for International Development, on 18th October 2012.

Business has a vital role to play in economic development, reducing poverty and helping to build countries that will be ever more valuable trading partners for the UK. What is good for business should be good for society.

Last year, DFID set up a Private Sector Department to spearhead a new level of engagement with the private sector. I want to spend the next few minutes telling you about why the private sector is important and how we are harnessing the power of private enterprise to generate opportunity and prosperity for poor people in developing countries.

The private sector’s role in poverty reduction

We know that economic growth is the primary driver of poverty reduction and that the private sector is the engine of that growth; creating new jobs, opportunities, markets and prosperity. For example, 90% of jobs in the countries in which we work are generated by the private sector.

Private enterprise is not just a generator of wealth. The majority of goods that poor people buy and many basic services that they need are also provided by the private sector. Poor people buy some of their healthcare provision from private and other non-state providers – over 50% of parents in sub-Saharan Africa, and over 80% in South Asia – or choose to pay for their children’s education – more than half of the children in school in Lagos, Nigeria attend low-fee private schools. New thinking within the private sector offers insights in to how to ensure better access to these vital goods and services.

How we are working with the private sector

I am now going to briefly outline how DFID is working to maximise the development impact of business to increase investment opportunities; support new approaches; and help business to act responsibly.

Firstly, we are helping to accelerate growth by increasing investment in poor countries.

We have revitalised CDC – the UK’s Development Finance Institution – which has almost £2bn invested.  CDC now has a clear focus on poor countries.

Our £75m contribution to the International Finance Corporation for a new finance facility for small and medium enterprise will share risks with banks to increase lending to small and medium enterprises. The facility is expected to increase investment capital available to some 200,000 SMEs over the coming years.

Secondly, we are developing new approaches to business that generate profits and have strong developmental impact.

For example, we have helped transform a rural sales programme that generates income for rural women in Bangladesh from charity into a private company – JITA – through technical assistance from DFID’s Business Innovation Facility. JITA’s door to door saleswomen sell affordable basic goods, such as soap, toothpaste, washing powder or vegetable seeds. So far, JITA has provided income earning opportunities for over 2,800 women and expects to reach 12,000 by the end of 2014.

DFID also supports UK and European retailers to test innovative approaches that develop or expand routes to market for African food producers, through the Food Retail Industry Challenge Fund.  One project, led by Taylors of Harrogate – who are here today – works with Rwandan factories and smallholder tea growers to help improve production and processing techniques. This has resulted in a secure, direct source of premium tea for Taylors and contributed to higher returns being shared equitably amongst factory owners and over 10,000 tea growing smallholders.

Thirdly, we promote business that is responsible.

DFID is committed to raising standards; encouraging the private sector to invest and operate in developing countries in a way that is socially responsible, environmentally sound and legally compliant.

Of course, DFID provides support to the global Fairtrade system through our £12m Programme Partnership Arrangement with Fairtrade International. Our support, along with that of other donors, is helping to strengthen, broaden and deepen the impact of Fairtrade.

Our work on codes and standards is complemented by specific interventions aimed at improving the working conditions for people in developing countries, often working in international supply chains. For example, we provide support to the Ethical Trading Initiative, which drives better working conditions for 8.6 million workers in 40,000 supplier companies. We help retailers and civil society organisations change working practices in factories that make ready-made garments for the UK market, through our Responsible and Accountable Garment Sector programme. Projects have shown that private enterprise can be both good for business and good for society. Workers pay and working hours have improved, simultaneously with improving business results.

Why Fairtrade is important

Since the launch of the first Fairtrade label in 1988, to becoming the most widely recognised ethical label globally, Fairtrade’s unique proposition has always been to help farmers and workers get fair prices and improve the quality of their lives. Today, Fairtrade supports over 1.2 million farmers and workers in over 66 countries, which is a magnificent achievement.

We see Fairtrade as a good example of how consumers, producers, businesses, non-governmental organisations and governments can work together to help improve the lives of poor people.

Yes, there are critics of Fairtrade, and we know that we need to build the evidence base so that we can see more clearly the impact certification is having on the lives of poor people. Fairtrade is already involved in work that is helping them to better monitor and evaluate their impact.

There are challenges ahead, but we have many examples of how Fairtrade helps retailers and brand owners engage more directly in their supply chains, enabling them to demonstrate the social and environmental impacts of their buying decisions.

As you know, there have been a number of large scale commitments made by big companies to Fairtrade. In 2008, Tate & Lyle announced their commitment to convert 100% of their retail branded sugar to Fairtrade. Kraft’s Cadbury Dairy Milk and Nestle’s Kit Kat committed to go Fairtrade in 2009, and this year, Mars Maltesers gained the Fairtrade mark.

These commitments bring about real change in people’s lives, and are testament to the growing efforts being made by business to integrate fair and sustainable sourcing into their core business practice. Of course, we must not forget the number of small and medium enterprises and dedicated fair trade companies who have promoted ethical business for many years, and continue to do so today.

The UK currently leads the world in driving Fairtrade. We account for over a quarter of global Fairtrade sales. Half of UK consumers say they regularly purchase Fairtrade products. I wish you all well for a productive and engaging conference and challenge you all to reach new heights in harnessing the power of responsible enterprise for development.

Below is the text of a speech made by the International Development Minister, Alan Duncan, at the launch of the 2012 Global Hunger Index. The speech was made in London on the 15th October 2012.

I am delighted to be here at the UK launch of the 2012 Global Hunger Index.

As the latest report by the International Food Policy Research Institute confirms, there has been some progress in reducing global hunger. However, it can only be described as modest progress, as many of the world’s poorest and most vulnerable people remain in serious danger of hunger and malnutrition.

The Global Hunger Index report explicitly highlights the especially worrying situation in South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa. Almost a billion people are still going to bed hungry every night. Another billion lack the necessary nutrition to live healthy lives.

According to the 2012 Global Hunger Index, 20 countries had levels of hunger that were “alarming” or “extremely alarming.” That’s without even taking into account the food crises in the Horn of Africa and the Sahel region. Some of the countries with the highest hunger burden – such as Somalia, Burma and the Democratic Republic of Congo – were not included because there quite simply just isn’t enough accurate data.

Nobody quite knows how many hungry people there are in the world. Whatever the specific number, it is clear that levels of hunger and malnutrition are quite simply unacceptable. And what we do know about probably understates quite significantly the wider problem.

This is why, since 2008, the UK has more than doubled its spending on tackling malnutrition and has significantly increased its programmes, which now cover 15 countries within our direct bilateral activity.

Just last week I visited Yemen, where I saw at first hand the pressing need to address the hunger crisis that is escalating there. I am pleased to report that DFID has recently launched a new programme which will focus on the prevention and treatment of acute malnutrition for up to 1.6 million Yemeni women and children. Over the next three years, specifically out of our £200m programme, £35m will be invested in tackling this critical issue. I think it’s true to say that when you lift the lid on Yemen you find that nearly a quarter of infants are malnourished.

Other examples of the UK’s work include Bangladesh, where we are delivering vitamins, minerals and other nutrition support to adolescent girls, pregnant women, and to 225,000 children under the age of 5. In Zambia, the UK is using Coca-Cola’s distribution channels to expand the provision of oral rehydration and zinc supplements for the treatment of acute diarrhoea.

Between 2011 and 2015, the UK will reach 20 million children under the age of 5 with nutrition programmes. We will also ensure that another 4 million people including adults have enough food through the year.

The recent high level event on hunger hosted by the PM at Number 10 galvanised global efforts to reduce wide scale malnutrition. Government representatives, non-governmental organisations, and private companies all forged a strong partnership to act on the challenge together. I also recently spoke at the Scaling Up Nutrition event in the margins of UN General Assembly, which brought together key partners to address this important issue, and I’m pleased to say that when I was in Yemen last week, they too agreed to join the initiative themselves.

We’re not only supporting nutrition-specific programmes. We are also making sure that other sectors, for example agriculture, deliver better outcomes in the fight against global hunger.

We’re making sure that our programmes help people to become more resilient to shocks and disasters, so that they can protect their food security and livelihoods, and continue to work their way out of poverty once an emergency is over.

For our programmes to be effective in transforming the lives of those most in need, it’s essential that we have access to reliable data. The UK recognises the importance of data analysis and rankings not only to promote accountability and transparency, but also to help track trends and emerging issues. The Global Hunger Index has helped create a better picture and establish greater understanding of this crisis.

But, more data is needed. We need to strengthen the quality of data on hunger and malnutrition. For us to be successful in our efforts to eradicate hunger, we need better information on who is hungry, when, where and crucially why. We need it faster. We need to reveal and tackle where the problems are the worst. We need commitment from everyone, including from responsible governments, donors, implementing agencies, and academic experts. We all need to be more accountable for the action we have taken and ensure that our deployment of resources is effective.

The UK Government is committed to helping end hunger and malnutrition. We believe that this ambitious goal can be achieved by working in close partnership with countries, with the private sector, with multilateral organisations and with NGOs. Organisations like Concern, the International Food Policy Research Institute and German Agro Action have a vital role to play in helping us achieve this goal.

So I am very pleased to reiterate my endorsement of and support for all you are doing, and to give my full endorsement to the Global Hunger Index. And with a metaphoric ribbon, consider yourself duly launched!