Britain "relieved" that damaging time is over at World Bank

May 18, 2007, 12:19 GMT

London - The British government Friday restated its 'steadfast support' for the World Bank as an institution but said it was 'relieved that the damaging time' for the Bank was over.

The comments came in an official statement marking the announcement Thursday that World Bank president Paul Wolfowitz is to resign following months of pressure over his handling of a pay package for his partner, an employee at the Bank.

'I am relieved that this damaging time for the Bank is finally over,' a statement by Britain's International Development Secretary Hilary Benn said.

'I acknowledge the achievements of the Bank over the past two years...The UK remains a steadfast supporter of the Bank, and its staff, as a force for good in the world,' it added.

Meanwhile, British aid organizations Friday called on outgoing Prime Minister Tony Blair and his likely successor, Gordon Brown, to back demands for an end to the system under which the president of the World Bank is always an American.

Wolfowitz's resignation showed that even the office of the president had to play by the rules, Oxfam director Barbara Stocking said Friday.

The US and other rich nations now had to show that they were serious about good governance by reforming the recruitment process to allow the next head of the Bank to be appointed on merit and commitment to alleviate poverty, rather than being the choice of the American President, Oxfam said in a statement.

The current 'unjust and undemocratic arrangement' had to end, it added, in order to make the World Bank an 'effective and accountable' institution.

Christian Aid, the international charity, said: 'Two years on and Wolfowitz's regime has descended into farce. The self-styled anti-corruption crusader has behaved in a manner he was quick to condemn of recipient governments.'

Christian Aid's head of policy, Charles Abugre, said the demise of Wolfowitz was a 'symptom, not a cause, of the Bank's malaise, which were a direct result of the institution's lack of internal democracy.'