Are the provisions of foreign and international aid justified in todays climate of austerity?

The Uk are providing between 0.56 and 0.7 of gni in the next couple of years and Ireland almost 700m euros, yet both are in recession/ barely recovering and instigating austerity measures that are having an effect on most mere mortals in both countries.

Should charity begin at home or do you think it important we help developing countries?

Monetary sources IoS and Irish Aid (DFA)

If foreign aid is directed to the right areas and administered properly, it can benefit the donor country far more than the actual investment.

A few years ago the UK government admitted that giving aid to Africa could prevent a lot of economic migration of unskilled Africans to the UK.

(I don't know about Ireland in this respect)

But the sad fact is that very little government aid goes to where it's needed, rather to where the fat cats are.

Charitable aid is sometimes better, but again a lot is eaten up by 'administrative costs'.

There must be a better way.

But I would prefer that the people were consulted - told that such-and-such a percentage of your taxes would be used for foreign aid and would you prefer it went to "***here***" / "***here***" / or "***here***" and would you please indicate you first and second preferences.

Charity should begin at home but I think it is an emotive and convenient aphorism in this case.

I say that because I am sure that in the bigger picture you will find that that aspect has been very seriously considered in the budget. Factors such as HB pointed out (indirect benefit/saving) and others must surely have been calculated.

I would agree with HB and Harcourt. I think the foreign government run charity is done for political reasons that may be beneficial later on, and it has little to do with actually helping people. After the terrible Tsunami in Thailand and adjoining countries there was a lot of foreign aid given, but a lot of it was siphoned off to people who already had money. Most of the actual beneficial aid was done at ground level by people with very few resources, but who were willing to help those in need. Foreign aid to African countries has been a total joke and very little ever reaches the people in need.

There were stark contrasts in use of aid when comparing the flooding in New Orleans and the flooding a few years later further up the Missouri Valley. The New Orleans disaster was a cesspool of corruption in the use of government aid. I'll be interested to see how the aid is used when repairing the damage in Joplin, Missouri caused by the recent tornados.

On the same bus that takes the aid worker in carrying his charity donation, sits an arms dealer or the like at the back of the bus with a nice fat contract in his briefcase.

An interesting question Mossfin - where I sit in northern Queensland, Australia at present the economy has just taken a huge battering from tourism slumps due to currency exchange, as well as tragic natural disasters of cyclones and flooding in recent years, not to mention economic downturns in the rest of the country - particularly other parts of east coast natural disaster zones.

Still, Australia is expected to contribute a regular GDP percentage in international aid while many Australian citizens are living in tents and other forms of temporary accommodations, or lost their place of business; and may never receive insurance payments for rebuilding of housing and business premises.

Foreign aid is important and should be carried into the future for global sustainability but well-being in donor nations is crucial to keeping a cycle healthy.

On the same bus that takes the aid worker in carrying his charity donation, sits an arms dealer or the like at the back of the bus with a nice fat contract in his briefcase.

I am going to throw you a curved ball s', in '93 the UN were desperately trying to get aid to the needy in Mogadishu, but all the transport was being taken over by the Warlords of the area.

The U.S argued for greater military presence, to their astonishment it was agreed, so in went the army, navy and airforce, but more importantly, Delta Force and the Rangers.

What happened next is an incident that controlled American Foreign Policy Intervention for the next twenty years.

For the want of a nail and all that....

There has also been many recent studies that show how foreign aid is NOT working in Africa.

Trade on the other hand, is a more sustainable way to provide 'help'

I can't post link at the moment, but google

'why foreign aid is hurting africa'

On the same bus that takes the aid worker in carrying his charity donation, sits an arms dealer or the like at the back of the bus with a nice fat contract in his briefcase.

I am going to throw you a curved ball s', in '93 the UN were desperately trying to get aid to the needy in Mogadishu, but all the transport was being taken over by the Warlords of the area.

The U.S argued for greater military presence, to their astonishment it was agreed, so in went the army, navy and airforce, but more importantly, Delta Force and the Rangers.

What happened next is an incident that controlled American Foreign Policy Intervention for the next twenty years.

For the want of a nail and all that....

Very good point, mossy. That was just one such aid mission that didn't work out. When dealing with uneducated people who live in squalor, and who have only known torture, rape and murder their whole lives, they have learned not to trust anyone and are easily swayed by anyone in power.

The thread is titled: Foreign Aid - Justified in times of recession and austerity?

I made a reply to that regard, but thread seems to have gone off topic ?! Oh well...

khall

Good to see you back, but things are no different to a few years ago, there will be several topics on various directions running and your response and my op will continue to be answered, which is why I put in this forum and not the other.

An interesting question Mossfin - where I sit in northern Queensland, Australia at present the economy has just taken a huge battering from tourism slumps due to currency exchange, as well as tragic natural disasters of cyclones and flooding in recent years, not to mention economic downturns in the rest of the country - particularly other parts of east coast natural disaster zones.

Still, Australia is expected to contribute a regular GDP percentage in international aid while many Australian citizens are living in tents and other forms of temporary accommodations, or lost their place of business; and may never receive insurance payments for rebuilding of housing and business premises.

Foreign aid is important and should be carried into the future for global sustainability but well-being in donor nations is crucial to keeping a cycle healthy.

OK K'

I am not exactly sure it is global sustainability that is the driving force here, I will have to go back and read the article, but part of the reasoning of the Brit Gov't is down to reducing terrorism, reduce poverty levels and the future terrorist could be diverted.

The Chinese laugh and laugh at the West with the foreign aid thing. On the QT they are slowly buying Africa. Their idea of foreign aid is to build roads and infrastructure for free but only for concessions to build huge factories in the now connected backwaters using the locals as cheap labour. Yes, they build schools and medical centres at their factories, but solely for the purpose of keeping the workers on the job creating wealth for the Kingdom of Heaven. They control their investments. They don't throw millions ( billions) at totally corrupt administrations with no control how the money is spent. They engage said corrupt administrations making them both wealthy without a care in the world for the average " ant" who does the work. They don't pour money into trying to religiously convert said native, as they have no religion, accept power and money.

Here endeth the lesson on how China will one day rule the world

The Chinese laugh and laugh at the West with the foreign aid thing. On the QT they are slowly buying Africa. Their idea of foreign aid is to build roads and infrastructure for free but only for concessions to build huge factories in the now connected backwaters using the locals as cheap labour. Yes, they build schools and medical centres at their factories, but solely for the purpose of keeping the workers on the job creating wealth for the Kingdom of Heaven. They control their investments. They don't throw millions ( billions) at totally corrupt administrations with no control how the money is spent. They engage said corrupt administrations making them both wealthy without a care in the world for the average " ant" who does the work. They don't pour money into trying to religiously convert said native, as they have no religion, accept power and money.

Here endeth the lesson on how China will one day rule the world

I would agree with you completely, except that here in Vietnam there is a strong underswell of opinion which resents China's interference in the way of life of the locals.

Chinese aid is accepted, many power stations are funded from China (as an example). But then they are also built by Chinese contractors, which puts the local contractors out of possible work, and the chinese workers do not spend money in the community - everything is brought from China. Then the Chinese contractors insist on doing things the chinese way, not the accepted Vietnamese way (based on international practice). In my work I come across many of the local engineers - well-educated guys who will have influence in their communities. They are vehemently anti-Chinese - not only for the war that was fought after the Americans left (where the VNA knocked seven sorts of shit out of the Chinese), but for the bullying tactics of this Northern neighbour, tactics which they can see are against both their interests and what passes for normal behaviour in the outside world.

Admittedly Vietnam is not Africa, the population is quite well educated in the cities, improving in the countryside, and although there is corruption in high places, it is not on an African scale. But they seem to have got China's measure and are accepting what they want, rejecting the rest. (Except for bloody motorbikes - they may have Japanese names, but most are made in China)(and there are fifty million of 'em on the road I travel to work!!)

That would right Humph.

Forgot to add the compounds for the technically needed are there in Africa too. Not a jot or tittle from the local community allowed in. Food, drink, all from China, and all the wages either sent home or paid directly to the Chinese families bank account. No benefit whatsoever to the local economy....................

Yes - you are all correct - what is the common thread here? China! Funny, I was just reading a business article yesterday where the Chinese were condemning Australia for their "anti-Chinese" investment stance - oh, the Foreign Investment Review Board regulations - oh the environmental regulations - oh the labour laws - oh the 'proposed' carbon tax, mining tax - oh the list goes on.... the shocking thing about the article was that the author agreed that we were being a 'little discriminatory toward Chinese "investment" in Australia'.

Go figure! If the current govt has nothing right, they at least are not (hopefully) selling the ground we walk on ... otherwise, not much left here for foreign aid is there?