Part of the debate – in the House of Commons at 10:03 pm on 31 March 2009.
When it comes to mobilising enormous resources and making huge interventions that have the power to change the world, nothing compares with the power of government. This week's G20, led by our Prime Minister, will seek to do exactly that, following on from the Gleneagles summit and other major initiatives.
Of course, Governments lead by consent and, in general, they must reflect the priorities of the people. Although the people of the UK can be astonishingly generous, it is also a harsh reality that international aid and development rarely sit atop people's list of priorities, especially in these difficult times. Moreover, there is great competition for people's attention with regard to international development, and there is sometimes a risk that if Governments attempt to highlight too many problem spots in the world, people can suffer a sort of fatigue on the subject.
That is why the ability of some people and organisations, such as the Make Poverty History campaign, to influence and mobilise public opinion is crucial to giving Governments more power to their elbow to help the least well-off in the world. It is also possible for highly motivated people, sometimes with bags of media savvy, to make a targeted intervention aimed at changing the lives of many for the better.
In the case of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, I would like to mention an initiative that has the power to alter the lives of millions of women in one of the hardest places—perhaps it is the hardest place—in the world to live as a woman: the eastern DRC. In my view—I am not the most qualified to say this, but I have been out a few times—the best prism through which to view life in the eastern Congo is that of the experience of women who potentially face unspeakable sexual violence every day.
When somebody goes out to the Congo, as I and members of the all-party group on the great lakes region and genocide prevention have, they are struck by the many great efforts of the non-governmental organisations in the region and by how enormously challenging a task they face. The Congo has a population roughly the same size as the UK's, and it is roughly the size of western Europe. It is covered in tropical rainforest and it is a difficult country from a communications perspective.
The Government in Kinshasa were democratically elected through a great triumph of organisation, both by the Congolese and the international community, which made a great effort and contributed lots of cash. However, when visiting, one is struck by the fact that the Congo has a sophisticated body politic in Kinshasa, but an area of utter lawlessness in the eastern Congo. Many hon. Members from all parts of the House are familiar with the things that have taken place there, even in recent years—not just in the past 10 years, but in the past year or so, most recently with the CNDP getting the Congo on television by having, in effect, a kind of civil war. That is now being sorted in diplomatic terms, although Bosco Ntaganda, the man who now runs the CNDP, has been indicted by the International Criminal Court as an alleged war criminal. That will have to be dealt with in due course.
That is the politics of the matter. The reality on the ground is absolutely stunning, albeit in a very bad way. The first time I went to the Congo some years ago with a former Member of the House and good friend, Oona King, we were taken to a health centre where we were told that we would visit a ward. I was expecting a new build, Tesco-type thing, funded by a number of NGOs. What we came across was a kind of hut. The clinic comprised one room with a fridge, which had nothing in it because there was no power, and another room, which was an operating theatre and had some basic utensils—shiny instruments, sharp implements and things for holding hot water—that had been donated by NGOs.
There was a ward, and in the ward was a woman, apparently waiting to give birth to a child. The child, we were told, would be a breech birth—it was in the wrong place. A number of other hon. Members were with me at the time, but there it is: a mother was sitting there. It was one of those branding experiences that has not left me. We asked how long the birth would be and the nurse—a man who had had some rudimentary training—said, "It be may be tomorrow morning. She might last until the next morning." We said, "What do you mean 'She might last'?" and he said, "Well, she's going to die. There's nothing I can do about a breech birth. I've got the skills taught in some basic courses, but I don't know what to do about a breech birth. The nearest doctor is 2 miles away." Two miles in the Congo, through tropical rainforests and with all the logistics problems, which as my hon. Friend will know—possibly he is my right hon. Friend—