Leaders squabble, people starve

A GLOBAL UN food summit may prove to have been a waste of time, it was claimed last night, as delegates struggled to agree how to ease world hunger.

Representatives from 183 countries travelled to Rome for the three-day summit at the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO).

They had the ambitious aim of trying to secure an agreement on how to combat growing hunger and civil unrest triggered by the rocketing food and fuel prices.

But last night there were fears the summit would close without a declaration of intent being formed, amid drawn-out political squabbles on the sidelines.

As The Scotsman went to print, delegates were still entrenched in talks, amid predictions they could go on into the middle on the night.

Some delegates claimed Latin American countries were refusing to sign a declaration that showed biofuels in a bad light. Others said the agreement was held up by Cuba's insistence the UN dealt with the long-standing embargoes against the country.

Alberto Lopez, a member of the Spanish delegation, said: "I think we must not confuse the goal of this summit with political goals."

Abdoulaye Wade, the president of Senegal, a sceptic of international attempts to solve hunger and a critic of the FAO, said the summit was a waste of time.

"There's been a brutal rise in prices (of food] and we were told there was a threat hanging over the world and all the heads of state were called to attend," he said. "I thought it was going to be to answer the question about what should be done, but it wasn't that at all. It was just a conference like any other and that's why I was disappointed."

But others thought the event had been a useful process because it focused international attention on the issue at a time when aid to agriculture was at its lowest level for 25 years.

The summit also saw about £3 billion of new aid pledged to help ease the food crisis and the charity Oxfam was upbeat about its worth.

Barbara Stocking, the head of Oxfam GB, said: "It would be very easy to dismiss this food summit as a talking shop.

"But it could be a stepping stone to better policies and the money to implement them."

Alex Evans, a food-price expert with Chatham House, home of the Royal Institute of International Affairs, attended the summit, and said aid to agriculture currently accounted for just 3 per cent of global aid, compared with 18 per cent at its peak.

As a result, he thought it was useful to focus attention back on the need to tackle global hunger. "The outcomes are not going to set the world on fire," he said. "There's no real concrete outcome here in terms of a new deal. But I think it's useful to focus policy leaders on the issue."

Josette Sheeran, head of the World Food Programme, which delivers emergency supplies, agreed. "This is at the top of the global agenda and it's none too soon," she said. "Hunger is on the march."

And Matthew Wyatt, deputy head of the UN's International Fund for Agricultural Development, also said it was crucial to have brought the issues back on to the global agenda.

"Talking is important." he said. "Of course talking is very different to action, but it's a start. For the last 30 years, agriculture and food security have barely featured on the international agenda."

The final draft of the summit declaration called for stepped-up food production, reduced trade restrictions and more research on biofuels.

At the start of the week, Ban Ki-Moon, the UN secretary-general, called for food production to be increased by 50 per cent by 2030. He predicted as much as £13 billion a year may be needed to increase food production.