Press conferences by themselves will not feed the hungry, heal the sick or help to transform badly underdeveloped economies and societies. The announcements by George W. Bush and Tony Blair on Tuesday night were, nonetheless, significant and suggest that the G8 summit in Edinburgh next month may produce a blueprint which is not only ambitious but practical. The Prime Minister was right to sound upbeat in the House of Commons yesterday and it was appropriate that Michael Howard and Charles Kennedy offered him their backing.

The centrepiece of what emerged from the talks in Washington was a significant narrowing of the differences on how to eliminate the debts of 25 of the poorest nations in Africa. Mr Blair hopes that a complete understanding might be secured at the conference of G8 finance ministers this weekend. If it is, the persistence of the Prime Minister and the Chancellor will have been rewarded. But it is important to remember that the relief of debt is not some magic wand that will ensure that Africa enjoys an improved future. It is a potentially useful beginning but only if it is seen through to the proper end.

It has suited some ignorant quarters to cast the debate about how best to assist Africa as the Bush Administration versus the rest of the civilised world, with the President himself portrayed as indifferent towards the suffering of a continent. The facts tell a rather different story. American financial support to sub-Saharan Africa has tripled during Mr Bush’s tenure in the White House and the US donates almost a quarter of the resources directed to this region. He has also been responsible for both renewing and for extending the African Growth and Opportunity Act which was originally enabled under Bill Clinton.

What the US has rightly been determined to ensure is that the withdrawal of debt makes a positive difference to the poor rather than providing a fresh comfort zone for corrupt governments to squander money. The history of Africa and aid has been depressing. No part of the planet has received more and done less with it. The debt that campaigners aspire earnestly to see disappear was not forced on these nations. It was eagerly solicited and then all too often siphoned off for private purposes. Mr Bush and Mr Blair have to make certain that this pattern is not repeated. This is not a matter of “tough love”, but of common sense; and it is in Africa’s interests.

In that light, it cannot be asserted often enough that while aid is at best a pain reliever, trade provides a path away from deprivation. Mr Howard noted yesterday that the US engages in a range of protectionist practices that make it hard for African goods to reach its vast market. He is correct. Yet America is, alas, not alone in this respect, and the EU should scrap the dire Common Agricultural Policy.

The most important example of protectionism constricting Africa’s prospects, though, is self-imposed. Far too many regimes have shut themselves out of the economic system rather than have a door slammed on them. The past five years have witnessed an unprecedented fall in absolute poverty as China and India embraced market economics. If debt relief could provide a cushion to African nations while they adopt that approach, it will be beneficial. Should real change not occur, this assistance will count for little other than in providing a salve for Western consciences.

Explore UK News

• Crime News

• Education News

• Health News

• Scotland News

Times Recommends

• The playboy and the Tory party leader
• Bin Laden's family tree is impenetrable jungle
• Paul McCartney