Whle HMG wholehartedly supports the laudable aim of increasing liberary access it feels compeled to question the absence of provision for localised rural educational materials in those areas so remote as to be beyond consideration for such a scheme.
The greatest levels of illeteracy occur in isolated villages. To obtain the optimum return on funds resorces need to be moved to those who cannot move to such eduational facilities as are already in existance. We therefore favor a small scale localised approach. The mountain must move to Mohamed.
With particular regard to the larger scale and more centralised liberaries suggestion HMG has concerns about the placement of infrastructure. Given the fractured nature of many developing countries it would be undesirable if development grants were to be used to reward political/ ethnic/ tribal or religious loyalties. While it would be counter-productive to appear paternalistic or to infringe the soverignty of developing nations it would be deeply regretable if this vital project were to become, what the Americans refer to so colourfully to, as pork contracts.
HMG therefore requires systems in place to insure these funds go to those who most require it, especially those least geographically and politically favored under the status quo.
Gin and Tonic, UK