The verdict of Britain's International Development Committee (IDC) on the international community's policy towards the occupied Palestinian Territory, released on Wednesday, was suitably damning. As they did with a similar report in 2004, the IDC put the development situation at the centre of their analysis. Unfortunately, in our experience, British Prime Minister Tony Blair and his government tend to let humanitarian imperatives in this region play a very weak second fiddle to a foreign policy that many, including many of us in the humanitarian community, are longing to see the back of.

The report documents a humanitarian crisis that was triggered by the election of Hamas and the type of blunt reaction that we have become accustomed to from the international community since 9/11: the freezing of aid. Israel took the cue to freeze tax revenues. So Palestinian children and their families have, for over a year, been without the life preserving aid that they need because their ability to develop and sustain a working economy is critically hampered by the restrictions placed on them by Israel, and without the money that they should surely be able to rely on, their own taxes.

I went to Gaza at the end of last year. I saw how much Palestinian children are suffering. But more shocking even than the obvious hardship was the utter lack of hope. One girl I met in Al-Shoka refugee camp said, on being asked what they might be able to do to help improve their immediate environment, "Why bother. It will only get destroyed again." The sort of horrors that should not blight any childhood are the building blocks of daily life for Palestinian children.

British Secretary of State for International Development Hilary Benn, leading advocate for good humanitarian practice in so many arenas and candidate for Deputy Prime Minister, does not have much to be proud of here. He says that Britain gave more aid in 2006 than in previous years. True enough. But, as humanitarians, we judge the value of aid by its impact first and cash value second. Over the same period, poverty levels have increased by over 20 percent, hospitals are running out of essential medicines; countless statistics detail the decline and the IDC does a good job documenting a truly awful humanitarian crisis, particularly in healthcare.

It's not all the British government's fault, of course, but they do have a case to answer. They led the decision to instigate an aid boycott of the Palestinian Authority immediately after the election of Hamas. They then helped to put in place a new aid mechanism that, though useful at helping some of the worst affected families, is incapable of keeping basic services running.

Aid agencies were asked in December to present Mr Benn and the Prime Minister with options for how they might help diffuse the humanitarian crisis. We demonstrated, not for the first time, how, through steps like securing access for emergency workers and using international monitors to kick start the movement of essential goods, alleviating the worst suffering is not only possible but will, in all likelihood, take some of the crushing pressure off the political process.

We were, in effect, asking for the immediate needs of Palestinian children to be put at the centre of decision-making, if only for long enough to ease the worst affects of the aid and tax freeze. We were asking for Britain's sound humanitarian principles to guide its foreign policy, rather than having them continue to be subjugated to the political agenda.

We have recently seen the release of a small part of the tax revenues, and there is a hanging promise that the EU, at Britain's behest, may do something to help build the capacity of some Palestinian institutions. Neither, however, is equal to the task of alleviating suffering, and both at best tinker with humanitarian instruments buckling under the strain of bad foreign policy.

It's difficult to think what I could possibly say to those children I met in Gaza, if they ask me on my next visit why they are being made to suffer so badly, for so long. I'm unable to say that the British government is doing its all to try and help them by, among other things, keeping aid and politics as separate as possible. I can't say that the wider world understands that their suffering is awful, and important, and should guide plans for making things better. All I can honestly say is, "Sorry, but my government thinks your parents voted wrong." And as a humanitarian, I blanch at this thought.

Reuters AlertNet is not responsible for the content of external websites.