The case for debt reduction is rooted above all in moral considerations. It is fundamentally unacceptable for the world to tolerate a situation in which the some of the world s poorest and most vulnerable citizens are left paying for the past mistakes of creditors and debtors. Unfortunately, it is often forgotten that unsustainable debt is about more than foreign exchange losses. It is about the transfer to wealthy countries of resources which should be used for development in poor countries. The human face of debt is represented by children denied an opportunity for education, primary health clinics without drugs, and about destroyed livelihoods.
Debt relief is also a matter of common sense.
While it is true that the proposals outlined in this paper imply financial costs, earlier and deeper debt relief would cost considerably less than the industrialised countries spend subsidising their agriculture. And the benefits would be reflected in increased prosperity and a reduced risk of social collapse. In the longer-term, the costs of continuing with the current HIPC framework will be considerably higher than the cost of removing what is now one of the main barriers to global poverty reduction efforts. When HIPC was developed in 1996, Oxfam and many other organisations welcomed the initiative. It provided a comprehensive and integrated framework.