The Budget

[cashman]

Originally Posted by steeljack

Seem to remember a few years back the UK gave a few million £s to India for development aid and they spent it buying fightger planes from Russia , caused a few "raised eyebrows" at the time , but the aid continued

some seem to overlook these things steely, but jump on the soapbox.

[Mancie]

Originally Posted by garinda

Or it might, as many people fear, mean a few more gold taps in a despot's mansion, or arms for an autocrat's soldiers, to keep his people from being free.

that may well be true.. but what is the alternative... let people starve and die of disease because we are told we are a bankrupt nation?

[andrewb]

Originally Posted by Mancie

International aid should be kept.. we are talking about a very small percentage of national income.. like under 2%.. you may be able to set up a few satelite dishes for that money in Britian, but it could mean water and a decent start for some kids on this planet.

Absolutely Mancie. Yes we should properly coordinate where the money is going to ensure it's spend on the right people, but the principle of investing in international development is the right thing to do.

[garinda]

Originally Posted by Mancie

that may well be true.. but what is the alternative... let people starve and die of disease because we are told we are a bankrupt nation?

Not 'may', is true.

Factual.

If years of pouring financial aid into the third world, with no strings, hasn't worked, and people are still suffering, then yes, how the problem is addressed does need changing.

'Aid always has been – and still is – ripped off by warring factions no matter how well-meaning or competent the international aid agencies. This is simply the nature of conflict and humanitarian crisis. Aid is a resource to be exploited, whether for weapons, personal gain or political power. The Pakistanis and Afghan mujahideen did it; Angola's Unita rebels did it; and so did the government and guerrillas in Ethiopia. Organisations such as the International Committee of the Red Cross openly and transparently assume that some of their aid (30% in Somalia) will be stolen.'
Response: The BBC was right to report claims of aid abuse in Ethiopia | Comment is free | The Guardian

[cashman]

Originally Posted by garinda

Not 'may', is true.

Factual.

If years of pouring financial aid into the third world, with no strings, hasn't worked, and people are still suffering, then yes, how the problem is addressed does need changing.

'Aid always has been – and still is – ripped off by warring factions no matter how well-meaning or competent the international aid agencies. This is simply the nature of conflict and humanitarian crisis. Aid is a resource to be exploited, whether for weapons, personal gain or political power. The Pakistanis and Afghan mujahideen did it; Angola's Unita rebels did it; and so did the government and guerrillas in Ethiopia. Organisations such as the International Committee of the Red Cross openly and transparently assume that some of their aid (30% in Somalia) will be stolen.'
Response: The BBC was right to report claims of aid abuse in Ethiopia | Comment is free | The Guardian

have all these become our trading partners andrew?

[Mancie]

Originally Posted by garinda

Not 'may', is true.

Factual.

If years of pouring financial aid into the third world, with no strings, hasn't worked, and people are still suffering, then yes, how the problem is addressed does need changing.

'Aid always has been – and still is – ripped off by warring factions no matter how well-meaning or competent the international aid agencies. This is simply the nature of conflict and humanitarian crisis. Aid is a resource to be exploited, whether for weapons, personal gain or political power. The Pakistanis and Afghan mujahideen did it; Angola's Unita rebels did it; and so did the government and guerrillas in Ethiopia. Organisations such as the International Committee of the Red Cross openly and transparently assume that some of their aid (30% in Somalia) will be stolen.'
Response: The BBC was right to report claims of aid abuse in Ethiopia | Comment is free | The Guardian

ah well that's all sorted..you should be the Minister for overseas aid

[andrewb]

Originally Posted by cashman

have all these become our trading partners andrew?

In a word, yes.

The trade is a bonus however. The fact that we save people from dying needlessly is the primary focus. Helping a country develop by preventing deaths with cures I can buy on the high street is something well worth investing in.

[garinda]

Originally Posted by steeljack

Seem to remember a few years back the UK gave a few million £s to India for development aid and they spent it buying fightger planes from Russia , caused a few "raised eyebrows" at the time , but the aid continued

Some humanitarian aid is given, knowing it will be diverted into arms, to bolster various supported regimes.

'A recent document released by the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) has revealed that millions of dollars, allocated for victims of the Ethiopian famine of 1984-85, went into buying weapons for rebellions. However, Robert Gates - President Obama’s Secretary of Defense said the suggestion cannot be ruled out that the CIA not only knew about, but supported, the diversion of aid funds to the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF)'
EthioGuardian.com ETG: Ethiopia: Aid money was spent on arms


I do think the majority of hardworking British taxpayers, do get sick and fed up of this happening, time after time.

They can see plenty of things their taxes could help to improve in this country, rather than be spent on arming third world dictators.

[garinda]

Originally Posted by Mancie

ah well that's all sorted..you should be the Minister for overseas aid

Okay.

Here's a shovel, now hop on your bike, and head towards the equator.

[cashman]

Originally Posted by garinda

Some humanitarian aid is given, knowing it will be diverted into arms, to bolster various supported regimes.



I do think the majority of hardworking British taxpayers, do get sick and fed up of this happening, time after time.

They can see plenty of things their taxes could help to improve in this country, rather than be spent on arming third world dictators.

nail bang on the head.

[garinda]

Originally Posted by cashman

nail bang on the head.

Last few taps.




'With global arms expenditures still running at around $2 billion per day despite the ending of the Cold War and with armed conflicts proceeding in 20 countries in Africa alone'

'Europe collectively gives more development aid to the Third World than the USA and Japan combined,'

'About one third of all the economic assistance given as aid to the world's poorest countries is spent in the rich world's arms markets, according to information from the Arias Foundation for Peace and Human Progress.'

http://www.europaworld.org/issue6/in...rans271000.htm

[garinda]

I suppose some people don't care that a reported one third of third world humanitarian aid ends up being spent on arms, as it greases the wheels of capitalist industry, and some rich, fat cat investors will find their pockets bulging.

Bulging so much they might feel inclined to bung their favourite political party a few hundred thousand quid.

[garinda]

It's the same principle as whether or not to give beggars money.

Do you drop a quid in their cap everyday, whilst they're off their heads outside the tube station, knowing they'll probably spend it on booze or smack, with nothing ever changing?

Or do you take them for a sandwich and a coffee, and try to find information about hostels and detox units for them, in the hope of breaking the cycle?

I know which option sounds more preferable to me.

[Mancie]

Originally Posted by garinda

It's the same principle as whether or not to give beggars money.

Do you drop a quid in their cap everyday, whilst they're off their heads outside the tube station, knowing they'll probably spend it on booze or smack, with nothing ever changing?

Or do you take them for a sandwich and a coffee, and try to find information about hostels and detox units for them, in the hope of breaking the cycle?

I know which option sounds more preferable to me.

Just goes to show how a life "overlooking at ducks and geese" can make people out of touch with reality.

[andrewb]

Originally Posted by garinda

It's the same principle as whether or not to give beggars money.

Do you drop a quid in their cap everyday, whilst they're off their heads outside the tube station, knowing they'll probably spend it on booze or smack, with nothing ever changing?

Or do you take them for a sandwich and a coffee, and try to find information about hostels and detox units for them, in the hope of breaking the cycle?

I know which option sounds more preferable to me.

Second option would be international development. We're not saying you should just throw money at a problem, it has to be specifically targeted money that actually helps people get out of the situation they're in. This is much more than just giving some foreign government a wad of cash.