M33 - Motion on Foreign Aid Watch

This discussion is closed.
Teaddict
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#21
Report 8 years ago
#21
(Original post by Student2806)
After having to lead a 2 hour seminar on development aid just a few days ago, I've come to the conclusion that the whole concept of aid in its current form is fundamentally flawed.
Whether we should increase or decrease our aid budget is neither here nor there. It doesn't work anyway.
Absolutely - so why waste money on it?

free trade > aid
0
ByronicHero
  • PS Reviewer
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#22
Report 8 years ago
#22
I agree that the system of how we give out needs to be altered but I don't agree that we should be giving less.
1
SciFiRory
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#23
Report 8 years ago
#23
(Original post by toronto353)
Yeah because that works doesn't it? How is India's space programme?
that is an issue with either who we give aid to or what the people we give aid to are doing, it is not an issue with the principle of giving aid.
0
Aeolus
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#24
Report 8 years ago
#24
:facepalm2:

We really need to get some perspective around here. Plus I agree with Stricof, this is wholly simplistic.
2
username521600
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#25
Report 8 years ago
#25
I agree. It is about time the people of this country were put first.
1
Anony mouse
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#26
Report 8 years ago
#26
(Original post by SciFiBoy)
No, sending aid to help the poor and vulnerable in other countries is a good thing to do and we should not be penalising these people for the greed of our bankers
Last October, Human Rights Watch published a report which documents how aid underwrites repression in Ethiopia and the ways in which the Ethiopian government uses donor-supported resources and aid as a tool to consolidate the power of the ruling Ethiopian People’s Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF). Ethiopia is one of the world’s largest recipients of development aid, more than US$3 billion in 2008 alone. The World Bank and donor nations provide direct support to district governments in Ethiopia for basic services such as health, education, agriculture, and water, and support a “food for work” program for some of the country’s poorest people.

HRW have shown in chilling detail how aid money given to the Ethiopian government has been used to coerce people into supporting the regime. Aid-funded education programmes are turned into government ideology reeducation camps; projects aimed at feeding the country’s poor are used to deprive the regime’s opponents of food; and other aid money is channelled to fund ‘retraining’ of judges and teachers. In short, Western aid money is being used by the Ethiopian government to create a totalitarian regime.
1
ByronicHero
  • PS Reviewer
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#27
Report 8 years ago
#27
(Original post by Anony mouse)
Last October, Human Rights Watch published a report which documents how aid underwrites repression in Ethiopia and the ways in which the Ethiopian government uses donor-supported resources and aid as a tool to consolidate the power of the ruling Ethiopian People’s Revolutionary Democratic Front (EPRDF). Ethiopia is one of the world’s largest recipients of development aid, more than US$3 billion in 2008 alone. The World Bank and donor nations provide direct support to district governments in Ethiopia for basic services such as health, education, agriculture, and water, and support a “food for work” program for some of the country’s poorest people.

HRW have shown in chilling detail how aid money given to the Ethiopian government has been used to coerce people into supporting the regime. Aid-funded education programmes are turned into government ideology reeducation camps; projects aimed at feeding the country’s poor are used to deprive the regime’s opponents of food; and other aid money is channelled to fund ‘retraining’ of judges and teachers. In short, Western aid money is being used by the Ethiopian government to create a totalitarian regime.
Which is why the money should be given not to the governments of recipient countries but to charities and aid groups working within them....
1
Anony mouse
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#28
Report 8 years ago
#28
(Original post by paddy__power)
Which is why the money should be given not to the governments of recipient countries but to charities and aid groups working within them....
You're right. Over 95 percent of the money that the government gives in aid goes to the governments of developing countries rather than to charities like Oxfam and the Red Cross. Many of the governments that we give aid to are corrupt dictatorships: for example, the top five recipients of DfID government-to-government aid in 2008/09 were Sudan, Burma, Ethiopia, Democratic Republic of Congo and Zimbabwe. These governments have no need to implement pro-growth policies and improve their countries. On the contrary – the poorer they are, the more money they get from the West – aid money incentivizes bad governance and rewards corruption.

Africa in particular has suffered from governments that have implemented harmful interventionist and collectivist policies (such as in Tanzania, Ethiopia and Zimbabwe) that have inhibited wealth creation. By rewarding poverty with aid, African governments have had no incentive to encourage growth in their own states and have become more dependent for money on the whims of Western donors than on the economic health of their people. They have thus had no incentive to promote wealth-creating policies in their own countries.

But it is surely naïve to think that, despite repeated attempts to solve this problem, aid can somehow be better targeted so that it doesn’t fall into the hands of corrupt elites. Third World politicians and bureaucrats will simply find different ways of siphoning off money. If we really want to help developing countries they should focus on removing trade barriers, particularly those imposed by the European Union. Any state aid that we do provide should be targeted towards countries during times of crises caused by natural disasters.
3
ByronicHero
  • PS Reviewer
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#29
Report 8 years ago
#29
(Original post by Anony mouse)
You're right. Over 95 percent of the money that the government gives in aid goes to the governments of developing countries rather than to charities like Oxfam and the Red Cross. Many of the governments that we give aid to are corrupt dictatorships: for example, the top five recipients of DfID government-to-government aid in 2008/09 were Sudan, Burma, Ethiopia, Democratic Republic of Congo and Zimbabwe. These governments have no need to implement pro-growth policies and improve their countries. On the contrary – the poorer they are, the more money they get from the West – aid money incentivizes bad governance and rewards corruption.

Africa in particular has suffered from governments that have implemented harmful interventionist and collectivist policies (such as in Tanzania, Ethiopia and Zimbabwe) that have inhibited wealth creation. By rewarding poverty with aid, African governments have had no incentive to encourage growth in their own states and have become more dependent for money on the whims of Western donors than on the economic health of their people. They have thus had no incentive to promote wealth-creating policies in their own countries.

But it is surely naïve to think that, despite repeated attempts to solve this problem, aid can somehow be better targeted so that it doesn’t fall into the hands of corrupt elites. Third World politicians and bureaucrats will simply find different ways of siphoning off money. If we really want to help developing countries they should focus on removing trade barriers, particularly those imposed by the European Union. Any state aid that we do provide should be targeted towards countries during times of crises caused by natural disasters.
Some will always be siphoned off but the extent to which aid is misused will be diluted by more effective and appropriate distribution.
1
TheCrackInTime
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#30
Report 8 years ago
#30
This thread has just given me an idea for a bill. :deal:
0
tbdavies
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#31
Report 8 years ago
#31
I agree!
0
StatusRed
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#32
Report 8 years ago
#32
(Original post by aaran-j)
This thread has just given me an idea for a bill. :deal:
I'm scared.
0
jakemittle
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#33
Report 8 years ago
#33
(Original post by Metrobeans)
M33 - Motion on Foreign Aid, thunder_chunkyThis house believes that in these times of financial difficulties and the cuts because of the deficit, it is time we re-assessed the amount that we give out for foreign aid every year.
I believe that it is important to keep giving aid. It is important for relations, development and our difficulties should not curb our ability to aid other countries that are in need, especially countries that will have a stronger economy than ours in the foreseeable future.
1
Joluk
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#34
Report 8 years ago
#34
It needs to be looked at yes, we shouldn't be giving aid to countries like India anymore.
0
jakemittle
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#35
Report 8 years ago
#35
(Original post by Joluk)
It needs to be looked at yes, we shouldn't be giving aid to countries like India anymore.
You mean, an emerging power that will overtake the UK soon right..?

Oh and a country that also has problems like this





0
Teaddict
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#36
Report 8 years ago
#36
(Original post by jakemittle)
Oh and a country that also has problems like this





Barking?
3
Joluk
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#37
Report 8 years ago
#37
(Original post by jakemittle)
You mean, an emerging power that will overtake the UK soon right..?

Oh and a country that also has problems like this
They need to take responsibility for it themselves, they have the money to change that, but they choose not to.

The money would be much better spent on some of the poorest countries in Africa.
0
jakemittle
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#38
Report 8 years ago
#38
(Original post by Joluk)
They need to take responsibility for it themselves, they have the money to change that, but they choose not to.

The money would be much better spent on some of the poorest countries in Africa.
I agree, but it doesnt mean that we should stop helping......
also money is not the only way we give aid you know
0
jakemittle
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#39
Report 8 years ago
#39
(Original post by Teaddict)
Barking?
0
Thunder and Jazz
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#40
Report 8 years ago
#40
Well, your motion is phrased in such a way that anyone saying 'no' is retarded. Of course we need to reassess. You should always reassess. But by reassessing we could be spending more money on aid. Or less. This motion is just an affirmation of common sense. It means nothing.

If you want to talk about whether we should spend less on aid, sure. Say that.
1
X
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Have you registered to vote?

Yes! (459)
38.06%
No - but I will (91)
7.55%
No - I don't want to (85)
7.05%
No - I can't vote (<18, not in UK, etc) (571)
47.35%

Watched Threads

View All