A six-year-old Ebola survivor has been found safe in the Democratic Republic of Congo, according to UK aid workers who have been involved in the contact tracing effort. The child, who had been missing for several days, was located in a remote village in North Kivu province. While this is undoubtedly a human success story, the cynic in me cannot help but focus on the staggering cost of these operations.
The UK has poured millions into DRC's Ebola response, and while saving lives is commendable, one must ask: at what point does the fiscal burden outweigh the marginal benefit? The child's survival is a testament to the doggedness of contact tracers, but the market for crisis aid is notoriously inefficient. Gilt yields remain low, but this kind of expenditure adds to the national debt, and the bond market will eventually demand its pound of flesh.
Inflation hawks will note that this money printed from thin air fuels price pressures back home. The real 'survivor' here is the UK taxpayer, whose pockets are picked again for a crisis a continent away. Contact tracing works, but it is a labour-intensive and costly affair.
The DRC government should shoulder more of this burden, or perhaps the World Bank could step in with conditional loans. But as always, the City of London ends up footing the bill. The Bank of England's quantitative easing has made Treasury officials blasé about spending; they seem to forget that every pound spent has an opportunity cost.
Perhaps the next budget will see a more rigorous cost-benefit analysis for foreign aid. Until then, we celebrate a child's life while the bond vigilantes sharpen their pencils.
