The Daily Telegraph has run an article in which Conservative
peer Lord Ashcroft, a significant donor to the party, has called upon the
Government to revise its international development strategy and to cut the
foreign aid budget. He notes that at a time when other budgets are being
reduced significantly and public services are being cut at home, there can be
no justification for such largesse with taxpayers’ money. Whereas the
international development budget stood at £7.8 billion in 2010, it will rise to
£11.5 billion by 2015.
Although such an approach may curry favour with political
elites overseas, it understandably raises the hackles of many voters at home.
Clearly, a radically new approach to overseas aid needs to be adopted in which
the budget is cut back to the bare minimum, with aid being limited to emergency
assistance in disaster situations; specific tightly controlled projects aimed
at reducing the birth rate in recipient states and general advice on
establishing good governance, democratic accountability and effective tax
systems. Without reducing the birth rate to sustainable levels in those
countries whose populations are exploding and tackling the endemic corruption
of many states, no amount of money or assistance will make an appreciable positive
impact upon the lives of their people. Once governments become truly
accountable for the welfare of their own people, they will have to act to
improve their lot or face the consequences. As matters stand, many corrupt
governing elites find it easier and more convenient to mask their own
corruption by blaming their economic woes upon an “exploitative West” or the
“former colonial powers”. It is time to stop subscribing to this narrative and
to jettison this politically correct version of “the white man’s burden”.
Throwing money at countries simply doesn't work, just look at Africa. Over the years how many billions have been spent in aid, and they are still starving. Where has all the money gone? Into the hands of the corrupt officials of course. Remember the story of the African 'diplomat' who bought a private jet with our money?
ReplyDeleteI read recently that Obama has now stated that Egypt is 'no longer an ally' because of the protests. And this after giving Egypt $73Billion in aid! We contributed a fair amount too, particularly with the so-called Arab Spring. Look how that turned out...
We still give millions in aid to China - the world's largest economy, and India still receives millions despite telling us they no longer need it!
Where does it stop? What clueless government official doesn't listen to the public, or read opinions in the press or websites such as this? Do they really have their heads buried so far in the sand they believe that by throwing our hard-earned tax money at these countries they will be seen as saviours?
The British Empire is another reason of course. Why do our politicians keep apologising for it as though the Empire was a bad thing. We were not the only country building and empire so why do we keep getting singled out? And our response? 'Here's another billion in aid Mr Ahmed!'
The whole overseas aid issue really does annoy me (you can probably tell). Those receiving the aid still hate us and our way of life, so why do we insist on giving them any money in the first place!
Paul
The approach to foreign aid over the years has been scattergun and increasingly profligate, and the many instances of the interception and abuse of aid funds are well attested to. India is a democracy with a society riven by extremes of wealth and poverty, but it should be the responsibility of its leaders to ensure that the miserable condition of so many of their people is put to an end, not ours. As well as a misplaced sense of 'post-colonial guilt' that many of our people possess, there exists alongside this a sort of patronising belief that it will take our intervention to sort out other countries' problems. Both of these attitudes are erroneous.
DeleteThe only link to borth-rates I can see is that the money going oversees is increasing poverty by fuelling corruption. If we take that away - and publicise the effects of sending aid in kind privately, eg clothes, which are causing textile industries through large parts of Africa to collapse - poor countries will start to generate their own jobs. More jobs equals more money which provides greater security, and THIS brings the birth-rate down.
ReplyDeleteThe dumping of goods - including agricultural surplus - in other countries has long been a controversial issue. It is vital that governments everywhere are held accountable for their actions, and to this end, Africa is in need of increased democratisation, but it should be up to Africans themselves to bring this about.
DeleteAs for arguments relating to the demographic transition and birth rates, would you say that the same applies in the UK? Why is it that certain immigrant groups possess very high birth rates, and others do not? Birth rates are not driven by economics alone, but by contextual cultural issues, and you can probably guess the identity of a particularly negative “cultural issue” that cloaks itself in a religious mantle and encourages female disempowerment and consequently high birth rates.
Taxpayers 'foreign aid' is nothing more than poor people in a rich country giving money to rich people in a poor country....
ReplyDeleteLaurie -
Often the case Laurie.
Deletewe should certainly stop giving money.
ReplyDeletepractical aid such as well digging equipment and related training would be so much more useful than the russian surplus military hardware our aid usually purchases.
we should also not aid non democratic countries or those who support terrorism.
Water Aid certainly does some good work in those places where governments cannot be bothered to supply the most basic needs of their people, but in the long run, it is governments that need to take responsibility for their own populations.
DeleteYou know what it ridiculous?
ReplyDeleteThe US is giving TONS of aid to countries that send terrorists to the US and that help in the terrorist activities in Southern Philippines and Southern Thailand.
While, the Philippines which has been battling Islamic supremacist since the 70's (yes, pre 9/11) has just gotten 30 million aid while countries that sends terrorists to the US and the Philippines got BILLIONS.
Is not that "sweet"?
It does seem, to put it in understated fashion (do bear in mind that I am English), a touch unjust.
Delete