Is there a deal on development? Gordon Brown tells us there is, but it seems vague on detail. He took a commendable lead in pushing poverty up the world's agenda, and there is a new commitment by rich countries to do something. But they cannot agree on what to do. This is why they promise 'up to' 100% debt relief, and on a 'case by case' basis, falling short of an historic and sweeping commitment to end poverty.

Gordon Brown touted an International Finance Facility to raise cash by selling bonds, enabling future aid to be given now. The US, Canada and Japan were skeptical. He wanted the IMF gold reserves revalued and sold to help write of debts, which the US and Germany apparently did not support (perhaps along with people whose portfolios include gold).

The disagreement over methods has been concealed by an agreement to study the various proposals put forward, including the no-chance French proposal for an international tax on aviation fuel. As Times economic editor Gary Duncan put it,

…while the G7 now agree that something must be done about Africa, they remain deeply divided over what. Saturday's communiqué embraces the need to take action and to provide more resources. But it fails to even hint at a deal by which these objectives can be achieved. It merely papers over the diverse positions of the different G7 members by committing them to look at every idea cast upon the table: British, American, Japanese, and French. There is no consensus and much conflict. Like the separate realities of Africa and the West, the competing approaches taken by G7 members remain worlds apart.

The Adam Smith Institute has long advocated debt relief, coupled with measures to prevent new unproductive debt being incurred. We have supported humanitarian aid on projects to fight AIDS, conquer malaria and provide clean water. But the biggest help will be to open our markets and to stop subsidizing our industries in competition. As more and more people are recognizing, it isn’t about sharing our wealth with them, but about helping them to create their own. Yes, let’s be generous because we can. But the aim must be to make them independent of that generosity.