The goal of poverty reduction should be a stable, loyal and productive society, writes Sayed Attia* The National Democratic Party (NDP) held its fifth conference through 1-3 November 2008 putting the issue of poverty as a priority on its agenda, according to its high-ranking officials. As a starting point in tackling poverty the government specified a thousand villages as suffering extreme or absolute poverty. While late for the party to speak about poverty, especially in light of policies adopted since the 1960s until now, it is a step in the right direction to reduce the burden of the marginalised in Egypt. In order to tackle the issue of poverty as a chronic social disease and inhuman feature of the 21st century we need to define the meaning of poverty correctly from the very outset. In planning for the eradication of poverty, Egypt's policy-makers should not restrict poverty to the classical definition of meeting basic needs or even the classical standard of the World Bank of disposal income below $1 or $2 per day. Using the standard of $1 or $2 as an indicator of the existence or non-existence of poverty is insufficient in judging the poverty problem. In adopting the Millennium Declaration in 2000, the international community pledged to "spare no effort to free our fellow men, women and children from the abject and dehumanising conditions of extreme poverty." The Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) specified the eradication of extreme poverty and hungry as the first goal, but regretfully the plan aimed to halve those who receive less than $1 per day through 2015 -- a very moderate goal, at least for Egypt. It is high time to speak about the quality of life, not how to reduce the number of those receiving less than $1 per day. What do we need to do to eradicate the poverty? In my opinion, first we must acknowledge that the Egyptian government adopted various policies in an endeavour to overcome poverty. In this respect, there is the Ministry of Insurance and Social Affairs (currently the Ministry of Social Solidarity) goal to alleviate poverty through pensions and social programmes, the "Productive Families Project" as a socially oriented plan, Gamal Abdel-Nasser's "Social Bank" to spread social equity in Egypt, the "Social Fund for Development", and finally Hosni Mubarak's "Social Solidarity" initiative. The last two were mainly launched as a precaution against the implications of economic reform and structural adjustment programme (ERSAP) requirements. Despite the fact that these policies were adopted by the government to reduce economic burdens on the poor, alas they benefited the non-poor more than the poor. For example, if we look at subsidy programmes we will find that the leakage from any programme to the non-poor is huge. Different sources reveal that the percentage of value of assistance received by the non-poor is very high. Regarding food subsidies, 83 per cent went to the non- poor; regarding electricity, 76 per cent went to the non-poor; regarding petroleum, 87 per cent went to the non-poor; and finally 76 per cent of the social safety net subsidy went to the non-poor. Drafting policies is insufficient. More important is implementing the policies to serve the purpose they are designed for. The leakage of subsidy programmes constitutes a strong wake up message to revise the policies adopted in order to make them effective and tangible for the targeted section of the population. All programmes targeting the poor need to be revised in this way. Studies of poverty in Egypt prove that most, if not all, of the poor are involved in the informal sector. In the informal sector there is a lack of productive technology, low level of productivity, high rates of illiteracy, lack of capital (either human or physical), a lack of investment, complex governmental regulations, and a lack of social security. Meanwhile, the informal economy constitutes nearly 82 per cent of total enterprises in the Egyptian economy and 40 per cent of the total labour force. The World Bank categorisation of poverty as income below $1 or $2 per day is not appropriate. First, it focuses on income poverty only. Second, there are other dimensions that should be taken into account, such as health and education. Furthermore, it is a standard that may be applicable or reasonable for a less developed country and not so for an emerging country such as Egypt. In Egypt, we have to start with the conviction that poverty goes beyond a lack of income. If Egypt is willing to deal with poverty properly it needs to understand that poverty encompasses economic, social and governance dimensions. From an economic perspective, the poor are not only deprived of income but also of opportunities. Economically, the poor have no easy access to markets and jobs due to low capabilities and social exclusion. Socially, the poor have limited access to education that lessens their opportunities to get jobs and restricts their abilities to get information that may improve the quality of their lives. More seriously, the poor have poor health due to inadequate nutrition, hygiene and health services that limits their prospects for work and reduces their mental and physical potentials. Further, the poor may be excluded from participating in decision-making regarding national and local social and economic development. In Egypt there is a tendency to tackle any issue at first in full swing while soon enthusiasm wanes and the task is left unrealised. Plans to overcome illiteracy are a case in point. Education is another example. Good intentions were there, but the current situation in Egypt tells a frustrating story. Eradication of poverty is a great challenge, but it is not an impossible challenge. In my view, Egypt is not lacking resources but rather lacks visionary policies that can endure. In reality, poverty is national security issue, not merely a social or economic phenomenon. In a dialogue recently with a French international politics magazine, Gamal Mubarak, chairman of the Policies Committee of the NDP, when asked about the factors that may lead to the instability of states answered clearly that poverty was one. To recall the words of Adam Smith from 1776: "No society can surely be flourishing and happy of which by far the greater part of the numbers are poor and miserable." The real way to eradicate poverty is through work. The government can adopt policies to reduce the burden imposed on the poor, but this should not continue forever. Government programmes could be restricted to the aged, handicapped and the more needy segments of society, not to all those have and have-not. And it is important to note that the problem of the poor is not that of the government only. It is a societal problem. All stakeholders must play a role in eradicating this problem: the government, NGOs, the poor themselves, human rights activists, parliamentarians, the media, etc. In conclusion, our aspirations should surpass meeting basic needs to improving the quality of life. The poor must be given the opportunity to participate in, and benefit from, the development process. The poor need honest guidance from stakeholders in the fight against poverty. The poor has the right to enjoy higher incomes, higher standards of health and nutrition, a clean environment, equal opportunity, more individual freedoms, a richer cultural life and self-esteem. Our conviction must be, "in the existence of poverty, there is an absence of development and security." The aim of the eradication of poverty is not a wealthy society but a humane, stable, fair, loyal and productive society. * The writer is a senior international trade policies researcher in the Trade Agreements and Foreign Trade Sector, the Egyptian Ministry of Trade and Industry.
