Unnecessary Aid

Today the Minister for Defence, Dr Liam Fox, had an email leaked which stated his opposition to the budget for overseas aid becoming set in law at 0.7% of Britain’s gross national income. Downing Street is seemingly disgruntled by this leak, but I have to ask the question: why shouldn’t Dr Fox voice this objection? It seems perfectly reasonable to me when virtually all other government departments are having to cut their budgets due to the deficit crisis. Since when is international aid considered to be so much more important than domestic affairs? The only other main department which is being financially ring-fenced is health, but even that is having to endure the prospect of radical right-wing reform. And overseas aid from Britain was only 0.52% in 2009, so apparently other countries are worthy of a budgetary increase in these fiscally restrictive times!
Another serious problem occurs when we consider which countries are getting most of our aid. If I were feeling flippant, I would say that Pakistan doesn’t deserve much at the moment after having singularly failed to detect Osama Bin Laden’s fortified compound for over five years! But unfortunately, there is a much more disturbing receiver of British taxpayers’ money: the Democratic Republic of Congo. I’ve half a mind to put the word Democratic in inverted commas, because the continuing sexual violence that takes place by militias in that country is probably the worst in the world; and recent wars in DR Congo have created the deadliest conflict since World War II, with 5.4million people being slaughtered. Why should they get any of our money?!
Finally, Britain now spends more on international development than on the environment, energy and sport combined (and that’s with the Olympics approaching!). And even though 0.7% is the figure that has long been favoured by the UN, it is not implemented by many countries. The US, the richest country in the world, only provides 0.21%, and Italy can only be bothered to contribute 0.16%, so why should we have to foot the bill? Therefore I think Dr Fox is absolutely correct to raise this issue, as many more people should in the near future.

Brown And Thatcher?!

When Gordon Brown - the Labour Prime Minister - invites former right-wing extremist Margaret Thatcher to a pleasant meeting at Downing Street, something is going seriously awry in the world of politics. This is a woman who if she had her way would decimate the NHS and make the meaning of life become getting rich! Of course Brown is never going to return to the glory values of Old Labour socialism, but to have tea and cakes with the arch-nemesis from the past is slapping previous leaders and reformers in the face. I imagine Tony Benn must be fuming while Clement Attlee turns in his grave. Up until this point Brown has acquitted himself with a steady, forthright attitude towards politics which I condone (and I certainly have no problems with the word 'stoical' as some of the media seem to), but this latest betrayal of great ideologies is an unnerving glance into what the future may bring. Hopefully, it will just be a glitch and policies will continue to rule news rather than self-promotional spin of being a 'conviction politician', or should that be 'conceited'.