Analysis By Evan Davis BBC economics editor

Polio vaccines are among the life-saving measures planned

It must feel that way to Gordon Brown at least because when our chancellor worked up his big idea of the International Finance Facility it wasn't the prime minister he needed to persuade, nor the president of the US, nor the Pope.

It was the official European statisticians residing in an agency, called Eurostat, in Luxembourg.

Mr Brown needed their blessing and he eventually got it on 2 August. With the thumbs up from Eurostat, the pilot version of the IFF was ready for its launch, which it gets on Friday.

Off books

So, why were the statisticians so important?

It is all because the IFF is really a clever way of borrowing money.

We borrow it to give out as development aid to poorer countries. We pay it back in future out of our aid budgets then.

There are a few curmudgeonly voices who point out some unhelpful truths

Now, no statistician can stop us borrowing money and giving it away: we have always been free to do that.

What was crucial to the idea of the IFF though was that the borrowing did not show up in the books.

It is Eurostat which decides what counts as borrowing and it decided that the mini-pilot scheme being launched today does not count as government borrowing.

It will count as international organisation borrowing, albeit to be paid back by governments.

Relief?

"Phew", Mr Brown must have said when the news came in. He has got more than enough borrowing on the books as it is and there would be no International Finance Facility at all if the borrowing had had to be added to the rest.

So, now the statisticians have given the nod, today's launch of the mini IFF should see a modest $4bn over 10 years going towards the global vaccine fund.

That will only cost the British taxpayer �70m a year but if it saves 10 million lives , who's complaining?

Well, there are one or two curmudgeonly voices who point out some unhelpful truths.

When we come to pay back this money in a few years, there will be less aid for the world's poor then. We are bringing aid forward - no one's going to get it twice.

Trade fears

And then some curmudgeons also say: Look at the countries signing up to this scheme alongside Britain - France, Italy and Spain?

Aren't these the very same countries who have been most vociferous in stopping cheap textile imports from China? Is it really sensible to hand out aid while obstructing trade from countries when they actually find something to sell us?

So in a way it actually gets to the heart of our whole relationship with the developing world.

This is meant to be the year of development, the year of Africa, but even this year it seems easier to make small cash handouts than big concessions.

The International Finance Facility for Immunisation will help people but it involves little political sacrifice.

It seems that when it comes to helping the poor it is less the big visionaries who are getting their way, it is more the book-keepers who determine what gets done.