Your comments on the "The dollar a day dress" programme, first broadcast on Sunday, 6 March 2005.

The e-mails published are reflective of the balance of opinion received.

I would like to see all governments of rich nations voicing protests to improve this situation. We are living in the year 2005 and I think we should, as consumers, demand that something is done about the situation these countries are in. People should not be living in these conditions when they are producing much in demand goods.
Steve Fuller, Hove, East Sussex, England

Interesting programme, but very black and white where there are perhaps shades of grey. Peruvian Alpaca farmers might well be poor, but your presenter mentioned nothing about the endemic corruption throughout Peru which means that large proportions of money or aid are "diverted" into alternative channels. It's difficult for rich countries to help poor countries when the leaders of those poor countries are sucking them dry.
Nicky Hampton, Milton Keynes, Bucks

I have lived in West Africa for almost twenty years and have been involved with cotton growers there. The section on cotton growing in Mali sounded very staged and artificial. The repetition of the phrase "American subsidies are killing us", which occurred three times, came across like something the cotton growers had been prompted to say, and, in my mind, completely undermined the integrity of your report. The continual emphasis that the USA is "the culprit", and only one passing mention that the EU also pays cotton subsidies highlighted the BBC's obsession on blaming the USA for all the world's problems. I was impressed.
Paul Briggs, Portadown, NI

the human condition seems, as yet, unable to grasp the true meaning and implications of 'globalisation' John Martin

One of the emerging concerns of our time. If only others, especially the U.S. would wake up to our interdependent lives so much more could be achieved. I fear that Gordon Brown's vision is ahead of its time; the human condition seems, as yet, unable to grasp the true meaning and implications of 'globalisation'. A fantastic programme, once again the BBC is at the forefront. Let's hope that it helps influence the thinking of many.
John Martin, Glenrothes, United Kingdom

What has happened in the third world is happening here; they buy cheap second-hand clothes and decimate the way money was made (in clothing factories) before we started sending our hand-me-downs. In the UK we import cheap clothes and do the same. Thus we pay less for garments, but have fewer jobs for people to spend wages on clothes. Another provocative programme - thank you.
Henry Pettinger, Keighley, West Yorkshire

What the consumer needs to know before buying is whether the garment has been ethically produced or not. Shouldn't information like this be made to be shown on the label? Then the consumer can make the choice.
Philip Wastell, Rochester

The developing world, especially Africa, all they want is the market for their produce. If they know that when they produce products and will be bought, they will work hard to financially support themselves and their family. The aid given by the West should be more focused to provide markets for agricultural products, people will help themselves.
Ben Byekwaso, Milton Keynes, United Kingdom

Surely I can't be the only person who would want to build a dollar a day wardrobe? Anne Purcell

Can this concept be marketed? Everyone needs at least on dollar a day item in the wardrobe. I'm going to a wedding in May. Amongst the wonderful excesses of this event I would like to be earthed by wearing a dollar a day dress. Surely I can't be the only person who would want to build a dollar a day wardrobe?
Anne Purcell, United Kingdom

I travel to many of these countries and it just makes me realise how lucky we are in the so-called civilized West to have all that we have. Unfortunately the majority of our people do not even begin to realise what we are doing to the developing countries and I wonder if we ever will. A prime example of crass ignorance, arrogance and sheer stupidity was the US ambassador and there are so many like her. Then people wonder why we are hated, especially the Americans in my experience.
Gloria Percy, England

This was like deja vu, after going to Zambia in 1996 and seeing the empty factories I asked the question why it was; the answer was clothes from British charities. The shame of it was that very few people were wearing their national dress which is great, and all wearing second-hand western clothes. The tragedy of this well meaning act which was not really discussed by your programme was that these apparently once thriving factories had all closed down due to lack of demand and there was mass unemployment demonstrated by groups of people just hanging around and dreadful poverty. Is this charity?
Jackie Sewell, Norfolk, England

The main thing that is wrong with the current system is US and EU subsidies. These subsidies are inconsistent with free trade Nicholas Bamber

The main thing that is wrong with the current system is US and EU subsidies. These subsidies are inconsistent with free trade. I have always been puzzled why anti-globalization protesters try to stop free trade agreements.
Nicholas Bamber, Oxted

I think it is a form of brainwashing for Africa/south America/SE Asia to believe the west is the reason why they can't get ahead. Sure the USA is a cancerous growth, but it is time those countries start taking matters into their own hands, stop corruption and exploitation from within and get strong and focused. If the west could so it , so could they. We are all human beings. Your programme again fed into the psychology that these countries are like children that need to be taken care of.
Laura Macleod, Oxford England

Congratulations on such a good programme on such an important subject: America 0, World Bank 1, I think - maybe there us hope for this world yet! It is almost ten years since I woke up to the reality that developed countries take more back in debt repayments than they give in aid and, as if that were not scandalous enough, it now seems that some of our aid - or our charitable giving at least - is having a negative effect too. I hope Hilary Benn was watching.
Martin Lack, York, England

It would also be useful to illustrate the likely impact on rich countries of removing our subsidies - would jobs be lost in the west? Would we end up importing more and exporting less? Would our standard of living have to drop? Or would the impact in fact be minimal? I imagine we in rich countries will have to risk a drop in our own quality of life (or at least in growth) in the cause of greater fairness to developing countries and greater global stability through more widespread prosperity. Many people will oppose this, especially those who may lose jobs. Will any politician ever be able to sell this to the West? This is a debate we must have if we are to promote the will for change amongst the voters (and hence the leaders) of rich nations.
Clare McGann, London, UK

I found it strange that, having discovered giving aid through charities harm the poor in these countries and devastate their economy, Panorama finished by reminding viewers not to forget Red Nose Day. Surely this is the problem all along and in fact Red Nose Day should be banned as it hinders rather than helps the poor of these countries?
Philip Barnes, Poole, United Kingdom

If the people of Great Britain and Europe pushed for the human rights of these poor people in their own countries perhaps we could swing the pendulum of poverty in their favour Peter Cockroft

Blaming America for all the worlds ills is all well and good, but if the programme had pointed out where we, Great Britain and Europe, had an effect on these countries, then maybe we would feel empowered to help the trade with the poorer countries. I don't feel that I or anyone else could influence American attitudes towards poverty in other countries, but if the people of Great Britain and Europe pushed for the human rights of these poor people in their own countries perhaps we could swing the pendulum of poverty in their favour. Forget subsidies that governments can cream off before the population can benefit. If we traded with the people their government could not steal it from them.
Peter Cockroft, Ipswich, England

Great - but where can we buy such fabric? If we can buy direct and know that the money is going to the people who produce the fabric then surely this is the best way to help and avoid the possibility of corruption.
Jayne Steadman, Orlando, Florida, USA

We need to realize that enabling poor countries to develop through undistorted free trade with certain social and environmental standards is not only our duty of fairness as humans, but also is in our own interest. In the long term we will profit more through the new markets and extra stability, security and environmental quality than we profit now from unfair trade and "protection of labour markets".
Matthias Wapler, Waterloo, Canada

The fact that people can be fooled into believing that corrupt governments are part of the reason for the plight of these poor countries is a tragedy in itself. Excuses for not doing everything that can and should be done to make the world a fairer place are fuelled by greed.
Gary Reynolds, Leeds, England

China will soon take over much of the manufacturing industry in Europe Roland Mitchell

China will soon take over much of the manufacturing industry in Europe. Their costs of labour is that low.What are our politicians doing now to ensure that there will be continuing employment in Europe?
Roland Mitchell, Rochester, United Kingdom

A very interesting programme, it gave us all an insight into the way 'free trade' is supposed to benefit all. However, there was, as many others have commented, an incredible Anti-US bias. For example non-English speaking farmers reciting the phrase "United States subsidies are killing us". That said, it wil be interesting to see how the US responds (and the EU) to the recent WTO ruling regarding cotton subsidies. The programme highlighted the 'fact' that the US currently pays subsidies totalling over US$4 Billion to their 25,000 cotton farmers. If you consider that the global population sees over 1 billion living on less than a dollar a day then this amount seems to be out of all proportion? It could have added a sense of balance if the production team could have supplied empirical evidence of the EU subsidies.
Carl Manning, Wimbish, England

The programme was interesting with a lot of valid points. However, there were some missed opportunities. Take Cambodia. Remember all those BBC documentaries complaining about Cambodia's move into textiles and garments as part of the "race to the bottom", with ruthless exploitation of labour? Only a couple of years later Cambodia is portrayed as the good guy, with good labour standards - proof, if needed, that freer trade provides the opportunity to improve living standards. The programme also misrepresented this year's ending of textiles quotas. This was not imposed by rich countries. Far from it. It was a demand of developing countries in the 1986-94 Uruguay Round negotiations that created the WTO, and it was resisted by the rich countries. The fear that Cambodia, Bangladesh etc will suffer badly as a result of the end of quotas is unproven. It's just too early to say. Panorama assumed that "economies of scale" will allow unlimited amounts of Chinese garments to flood the world markets, but we are already hearing of capacity constraints - Chinese wages driven up by the demand to expand, for example.
Name withheld

I have worked in the UK textile industry for many years and thing are presently at rock bottom. Cheap imports have undermined our business (loomstate cloth) seeing the closure of many finishers and printers in the Lancashire area. In some instances whole families out of of work in small villages such as Todmorden. The government does not seem to care. Job losses have been equal to those in the motor industry.
Josie Hamnett, Manchester UK

Surely the real story is what happens to the money that the charities make from selling our donated clothes? Sinbad Sidonia

Surely the real story is what happens to the money that the charities make from selling our donated clothes? In any case, thanks for pulling together the strands of this story - all of which have been out there for a while - for the British public. The dress was awful though.
Sinbad Sidonia, London, UK

A very interesting programme which covered a lot of the issues I am trying to address when teaching my fashion students here in Galashiels. To address the problem we have to educate the next generation of fashion designers to address these ethical issues in the design process right from the beginning.
Mark Timmins, Galashiels, Scotland