Henry Northover: Good ideas on change but let’s not forget our founding ambitions

The most fundamental issue facing us at the meeting was about the nature of the SWA partnership itself. There were some good ideas about change but I’m concerned about suggestions to broaden the geographical engagement of the partnership.
Why? Do we want to involve Brazil, China, Thailand, India as donors or developing countries? China has a US$27bn 5 year spending plan on WASH so it doesn’t need aid – but as a donor it is spending a rather more modest US$100m a year in Africa – about the same as WaterAid international alone.
Can the enormity of India’s appalling sanitation crisis be usefully addressed by SWA’s existing capacity and current comparative advantage? Involving more countries that fall into this middle group heightens the risk of diffusion of objectives and a loss of focus. Too many countries, too widely diverse partners risks the partnership chasing the lowest common denominator.
If we look to the SWA founding ambitions, it was about simplifying the clutter of international conferences and worthy declarations. It was about simplifying the resolutions and aspirations into time bound, monitor able and concrete commitments so we could hold ourselves to account.
We have to challenge ourselves as to a geographically broadened partnership to middle income countries (at this stage at least) would make us from World Water Forum?

Let’s not lose clarity on objectives. Let’s stick to tackling clear problems such as:
• Sanitation worst performing MDG sector
• Worst performing sector in targeting aid at the areas of greatest need and fewest resources
• Tackling donor co-ordination to strengthen country systems
Finally we need to emphasise that a strong partnership is a clear partnership. Clear commitments and reciprocal obligations against which we can hold each other to account.
Henry Northover, WaterAid Head of Policy