The sight of millionaire rock stars lecturing us about the plight of poorAfricans seems to anger some people.

That hostility is best captured in a book, written by an Americanright-winger, titled simply, Shut up and sing.

There were shades of that hostility evident last week when Bob Geldof, therocker promoting Live 8 concerts, criticized Paul Martin for failing tosignificantly increase Canada’s meagre foreign aid spending.

A Globe and Mail editorial urged Martin not to give in to “finger-waggingrock stars.”

Globe columnist Jeffrey Simpson tried to suggest the Canadian cupboard isbare, arguing there’d be no extra money for things like day care, thehomeless and post-secondary education if we increase foreign aid spending to0.7 per cent of GDP “as demanded by the Live 8 concert organizers.”

Simpson makes it sound as if the 0.7 per cent target is some wild ideadreamed up by a bunch of rockers.

In fact, it was conceived by former Canadian Prime Minister Lester Pearsonand adopted by the United Nations General Assembly.

And, in suggesting the cupboard is bare, Simpson leaves out of the picturethe many billions Ottawa sinks each year into reducing the national debt — even though our debt level is already the lowest among G7 nations.

Some of that money could certainly be redirected to urgent priorities — bothhere and overseas.

Back in the mid-1970s, we spent 0.53 per cent of our GDP on foreign aid. Nowwe spend just 0.26 per cent.

As we get richer, we seem to get less generous.

Of course, we can convince ourselves we can’t afford it, or that the poornations will squander it.

The bigger problem is that we’ll abuse the enormous power we have over poornations.

In the past, we’ve obliged them to open their markets to foreign investmentand to privatize their economies, in order to suit western corporateinterests.

We don’t make them do these things, we just refuse to lend them money ifthey don’t.

So, for instance, the World Bank, which is controlled by wealthy westernnations, obliged Ghana to privatize its water system, opening upopportunities for foreign companies, but forcing up the price of water.

Poor Ghanaians now spend 18 per cent to 25 per cent of their income onwater.

The World Bank notes enthusiastically that their “willingness to pay” isevidence that Ghanaians recognize “the health benefits” of water. Soundslike everything’s turned out fine.

The much-celebrated recent deal on debt relief, in which rich nationscancelled the debts of 18 very poor nations, suggests not much has changed.

The deal includes the same sorts of conditions about opening up to foreigncompanies that Ghana faced.

So the world’s poorest nations may soon be less in debt, but their peoplemay not be able to afford drinking water.

One thing is clear: Their voices won’t be heard over here.

If rock stars can get their message out, then I’d say: please don’t shut up.

Linda McQuaig

Journalist and best-selling author Linda McQuaig has developed a reputation for challenging the establishment. As a reporter for The Globe and Mail, she won a National Newspaper Award in 1989...