According to sources, the US government is expected to propose ending the nearly 60-year practice of buying food from American farmers and then shipping it abroad. The administration is proposing that the government buy food in developing countries instead of shipping food from American farmers overseas, a process that typically takes months. The proposed change to the international food aid program is expected to save millions in shipping costs and get food more quickly to areas that need it. 55% of the cost of American international food aid goes not to food, but to shipping costs.
So who would criticize the proposal to get food aid where it's needed more quickly, more cheaply and with more support of local food systems? Answer - the vested interests and corporations that are profiting from the status quo.
60 groups including the USA Rice Federation and the American Maritime Congress wrote to Congress and Obama urging no change in the system, and then went on to lobby over 20 senators from farm states to do the same.
Danny Murphy, president of the American Soybean Association “We remain absolutely opposed to the replacement of in-kind aid with cash, which takes a key market away from American producers”
Two-thirds of food for the billion-dollar US food aid programme in 2010-11 was bought from just three US-based multinationals. ADM, incorporated in the tax haven state of Delaware, won nearly half by volume of all the contracts to supply food for aid and was paid nearly $300m (£190m) by the US government for it. Cargill, in most years the world's largest private company and still majority owned by the Cargill family, was paid $96m for food aid and was the second-largest supplier, with 16% of the contracted volume. Bunge, the global grain trader incorporated in the tax haven of Bermuda, comes third in the list by volume, and was paid $75m to supply food aid
Is the goal of food aid to the needy profits or food security?
So who would criticize the proposal to get food aid where it's needed more quickly, more cheaply and with more support of local food systems? Answer - the vested interests and corporations that are profiting from the status quo.
60 groups including the USA Rice Federation and the American Maritime Congress wrote to Congress and Obama urging no change in the system, and then went on to lobby over 20 senators from farm states to do the same.
Danny Murphy, president of the American Soybean Association “We remain absolutely opposed to the replacement of in-kind aid with cash, which takes a key market away from American producers”
Two-thirds of food for the billion-dollar US food aid programme in 2010-11 was bought from just three US-based multinationals. ADM, incorporated in the tax haven state of Delaware, won nearly half by volume of all the contracts to supply food for aid and was paid nearly $300m (£190m) by the US government for it. Cargill, in most years the world's largest private company and still majority owned by the Cargill family, was paid $96m for food aid and was the second-largest supplier, with 16% of the contracted volume. Bunge, the global grain trader incorporated in the tax haven of Bermuda, comes third in the list by volume, and was paid $75m to supply food aid
Is the goal of food aid to the needy profits or food security?
No comments:
Post a Comment