UK Overseas Aid

India?

Wow thats impressive Adam,  clever old you.  

(NB:  typo correction - the ethiopian girl band number is £5.2million) 

What happened to  Ireland? 

and the owner of the big steelworks and JLR plus other companies?

Mike-B posted:

Wow thats impressive Adam,  clever old you.  

(NB:  typo correction - the ethiopian girl band number is £5.2million) 

I will happily take 0.2 million for my boys band if they have some spare cash

I wouldn’t mind betting the Ethiopian girl band didn’t receive 5.2 million.

With regards justification of the UK’s overseas aid payments to India, the Rumanians probably have similar concerns about the EU funding Wales to the tune of £4 billion since 2000, given the fact Wales is part of the worlds 5^th largest economy.

fatcat posted:

I wouldn’t mind betting the Ethiopian girl band didn’t receive 5.2 million.

With regards justification of the UK’s overseas aid payments to India, the Rumanians probably have similar concerns about the EU funding Wales to the tune of £4 billion since 2000, given the fact Wales is part of the worlds 5^th largest economy.

Please enlighten us as to where this EU magic money tree grows. I would like to get my fair share.

I believe that the outlay of money was not quite as it might seem from headlines appearing at the moment. My understanding is that the money was designed to fund a number of campaigns designed to raise the empowerment of women and girls in a country where womens' rights are often 'lacking'.

Here Is a quote from the program: 

"UK aid in Ethiopia is combating forced child marriage, violence, teen pregnancy, migration and school drop-out, which are holding a generation of young Ethiopian women back.

“In the Amhara region the UK's work on girls and women, including Girl Effect, has averted or delayed marriage for nearly 40,000 girls.

“All programmes are kept under review to ensure they are helping the world's poorest and delivering value for UK taxpayers.”

Yegna is billed as a “multi-platform culture brand inspiring positive behaviour change for girls in Ethiopia”."

By the way, LTAYLOR, I believe this was a UK initiative rather than directed EU funding.

Of course, you may still argue that the money could be better directed elsewhere, but the funding was possibly not quite as ridiculous as might appear from the headlines. Perhaps it suits the Government for headlines of this sort to appear just as it has decided to stop the project and its funding. 

Frankly, I suspect the integrity of any campaign got up by the Daily Mail. I think we should take some pride in our overseas aid, although much of it falls into the category of enlightened self-interest. I find it ironic that Priti Patel, who was part of the leave campaign, which claimed that leaving the EU would open up new connections across the world, is keen to shut down many aid projects. Although of course her interest seems primarily limited to the economics of trade. For example, the Daily Telegraph reported in November that the P Patel got rapped over the knuckles by the PM for trying to cut all funding to Unesco. The article makes clear that the proposal shocked Boris Johnson, who at least has some cultural hinterland. The article also notes that 40%  of UK aid is channelled through international institutions such as Unesco and the World Health Organisation. Of course, organisations receiving aid need to be monitored and assessed but the Daily Mail is unlikely to be the source of objective criteria.

Clive

Clive,  I agree your points re Daily Mail,  they report the Ethiopia aid was £9m,  most of the rest of the press & www news agencies agree its ~£5m

However,  whilst I agree that we should be proud of UK overseas aid,  I do find it very misguided & in serious need of refocusing.  That's the point I'm making on this thread,  why does UK send aid to countries like India (my target in this thread)  but also China,  these are world leading economies.   There have been reports that aid to India & China has been stopped,  but a Telegraph report in Nov 2016 indicates that is not so, it continues via other routes.

Politics and interests Mike? They are too big a countries now, so stopping is probably not an option. Something along the lines: 'damned if I do, damned if I don't'

Mike-B posted:

There have been reports that aid to India & China has been stopped,  but a Telegraph report in Nov 2016 indicates that is not so, it continues via other routes.

And long may it continue.

There are a lot of people in India that need aid.

I’m sure you wouldn’t suggest the general public stop giving to charities such as sense, scope and mind on the grounds that they help people in the UK, and therefore should be solely funded by the UK government.

Mike-B posted:

Clive,  I agree your points re Daily Mail,  they report the Ethiopia aid was £9m,  most of the rest of the press & www news agencies agree its ~£5m

However,  whilst I agree that we should be proud of UK overseas aid,  I do find it very misguided & in serious need of refocusing.  That's the point I'm making on this thread,  why does UK send aid to countries like India (my target in this thread)  but also China,  these are world leading economies.   There have been reports that aid to India & China has been stopped,  but a Telegraph report in Nov 2016 indicates that is not so, it continues via other routes.

Hi Mike

I cannot enter a proper debate on this because, simply, I am not well enough informed about the nature of our aid to India. However, I guess your ranking of India at number 6 of the top ten economies is based on GDP. Of course, to some extent the size of GDP is merely a reflection of size of population, so it's not surprising that countries with large populations will show higher up. In comparison I found that the CIA world stats website showing GDP per capita, ranks India  at no. 158 (China is at 113). I think this shows that these remain developing economies with a lot of poverty. Space technology could be seen as an investment that will reap technological dividends, although it is no doubt also an element of the competition for armaments in Asia (a desire for arms being something the UK fosters!).

Clive

PS Like one D Trump you may have scant regard  for CIA websites!

Cdb posted:

CIA world stats website showing GDP per capita, ranks India  at no. 158 (China is at 113). I think this shows that these remain developing economies with a lot of poverty.

I've travelled extensively in India,  not so much in China & yes the poverty in both countries is very obvious.  That said I'm used to poverty as I've travelled & lived in Africa.  The difference to me with India especially is very marked & what I find shocking is the difference between the very visible wealth of many & the abject poverty of others.     Same in China once you get out in the country,  then add Brazil another top 10 country,  then thinking about it I was in USA in November.        

I think Joe Biden said all that needs to be said about Trump & his regard for CIA    

I have lived and worked in India and Pakistan (and most of the Middle East). The observation by Clive that India sits at No 158 (out of c.200) in GDP per capita is relevant. IMHO the disparity between rich and poor in India is staggering. These factors justify our continuing Foreign aid to India in my opinion.

c.£180m pa is virtually insignificant to our economy and whilst it is also but a drop in the ocean towards India's problems, it does show we care and helps both sides continue to work together for improvements. I for one, don't begrudge it.

Frighteningly, I have seen serious poverty in Washington State, Oregon, Montana, Idaho, Wyoming and Alaska. It isn't confined to so-called third-world countries. Capitalism might well motivate and generate wealth, but it takes more than capitalism to make the world go round.

Look at the other side of the coin, India's annual military budget is over 40 billion dollars, making her the largest weapon importer in the world.

A www new report from Oct 2016 says 70% of India's defence equipment is from Russia.    They have just renewed 3 significant manufacturing partnerships - to acquire and make Kamov helicopters, 4 frigates & part assemble the S400 air defence system.   Additionally they are in negotiations for an all new battle tank & as this has delays & will take a further 5 years,  as  a stopgap they are adding a further 460 T-90 tanks to the 800 they have now.   $2.1 billion.  

UK has 227 Challenger-2 tanks.    I resist the urge to add a cynical comment

UK is an island. Considering the length of the hostile border between Pakistan and India and adding to it the very 'unfriendly' border with China to the east, the number of tanks doesn't seem excessive, especially taking into account that they are relatively cheap. Today, $2.1 billion will hardly get you one squadron (25) of modern jets. It would be interesting to know the amount of commission (or bribes in plain language) paid to facilitate these deals.

Given the uneasy situation between India and Pakistan those 1200 tanks may be needed to defend India in the near future.

 Britain on the other hand have 227 Challenger 2 tanks, whose armaments will never be fired in anger defending British soil. Why do we call military spending “defence budget” it should be called “attack budget”

Edit

Well, well. You type a reply, go and make a cup of tea and consider if anything needs adding before posting. What happens, somebody jumps in before you.

 What’s the saying. Great minds think alike, or is it!!!!!!!!!!!