International Labour Organisation Funding Motion

This House recognises that:

• (1) The ILO is weakly focused on development where like similar UN specialised agencies it expends significant resources in upper quartile and middle income countries with low absolute poverty numbers including upper middle income countries.

• (2) While the ILO does operate in support of international development goals, the it was the conclusion of the previous 2010-2014 coalition government that the ILO does not have an impact on the then MDGs or on global economic growth sufficient to justify its funding.

• (3) The ILO like many agencies with guaranteed budgets has a very poor cost efficiency culture and bad management.

• (4) That the millions of pounds sent by the government in assessed contributions, and voluntary contributions over the previous decade could be better spent on British priorities or if not at least it could be used support well lead cost conscious development organisations that actually make meaningful progress towards MDGs.

This House urges the government to:

• (5) Not make any further voluntary contributions to the ILO unless the organisation is deemed to;

> (i) be critical to achieving Britain’s development priorities, and

> (ii) have established a strong internal cost consciousness culture so that they deliver on those priorities efficiently using taxpayers money.

• (6) Advocate at the UN for a budget cut for the ILO so that less of British taxpayers money goes towards this weakly development focused, ineffective and profligate organisation.

• (7) To work towards development goals through trade deals with the developing world benefiting both citizens in developing nations and the UK through free trade.

This Motion was submitted by u/LeChevalierMal-Fait MP KCMG OBE on behalf of the Libertarian Party.

Please vote Aye/No/Abstain only.

This division will end on Saturday 14th March at 10PM GMT.

The gist of the ILO's report can be read here , and its full report is the first link on the article (also here). Essentially, new estimates point to a 14% job loss (equivalent to 400 million 48-hour-a-week full-time jobs). The "pessimistic recovery scenario" leaves us with a 340M job deficit y-o-y, while the "optimistic recovery scenario" sees a difference of 34M y-o-y; a neither-here-nor-there leaves us with a 140M gap.

Is it the same as in general assembly? Is the resolution writing same?

#International Labour Organisation Funding Motion

This House recognises that:

*(1) The ILO is weakly focused on development where like similar UN specialised agencies it expends significant resources in upper quartile and middle income countries with low absolute poverty numbers including upper middle income countries.

*(2) While the ILO does operate in support of international development goals, the it was the conclusion of the previous 2010-2014 coalition government that the ILO does not have an impact on the then MDGs or on global economic growth sufficient to justify its funding.

*(3) The ILO like many agencies with guaranteed budgets has a very poor cost efficiency culture and bad management.

*(4) That the millions of pounds sent by the government in assessed contributions, and voluntary contributions over the previous decade could be better spent on British priorities or if not at least it could be used support well lead cost conscious development organisations that actually make meaningful progress towards MDGs.

This House urges the government to:

*(4) Not make any further voluntary contributions to the ILO unless the organisation is deemed to;

*(i) be critical to achieving Britain’s development priorities, and *(ii) have established a strong internal cost consciousness culture so that they deliver on those priorities efficiently using taxpayers money.

*(5) Advocate at the UN for a budget cut for the ILO so that less of British taxpayers money goes towards this weakly development focused, ineffective and profligate organisation.

*(6) To work towards development goals through trade deals with the developing world benefiting both citizens in developing nations and the UK through free trade.

This Motion was submitted by u/LeChevalierMal-Fait MP KCMG OBE on behalf of the Libertarian Party.

——

Mr speaker,

Like many of the old UN agencies the ILO was set up in the late forties and has since then received precious little scrutiny and a guaranteed budget that nations must pay. Such a combination has created a prodigal culture, that is by no means universal or a preordained outcome at such agencies UNICEF for instance embraced transparency, accountability and understands broadly the need to spend money well both to maximise the benefit to stakeholders but also retain the confidence of its funders. Alas at this time we cannot say the same for the ILO. The only way to change that culture is to threaten its guaranteed budget.

Further