Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

VM374 - Prayer to Annul S08 watch

  • View Poll Results: Do you agree with this motion?
    As many are of the opinion, Aye
    44.19%
    On the contrary, No
    37.21%
    Abstain
    18.60%

    • Wiki Support Team
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    M374 - Prayer to Annul S08, TSR Conservative and Unionist Party
    This House condemns the illegal action of the Department for International Development and demands the government returns to acting within the law.

    This government in the budget failed to allocate the 0.5% GNI minimum required under the International Development Act 2015 [1] as amended by the Foreign Spending (2%) Act 2015 [2]. In the budget [3] only £8.5bn was allocated by Her Majesty's Treasury to DFID, this is despite the UK GNI being in excess of this figure. The GDP, which is only marginally higher than GNI, in the year 2014/15 would have lead to a minimum foreign aid budget under the Foreign Spending Act of around £9bn [4], further increased by two years of economic growth for an estimated required value for 2016/17 beaing closer to £10bn, meaning the shortfall in the budget was in excess of £1bn. Despite this the Chancellor and Prime Minister signed off on the budget.

    This is further compounded by S08 from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office [5] which intended to divert £1.2bn from this already low foreign aid budget into other areas, something illegal and impossible on several levels. It is illegal on the level that there was no sign off from the treasury for these spending changes, and impossible in that money has to be held to be transferred. However, the main concern is that this would push the department's spending even further below the legal threshold as it would bring foreign aid spending down to no more than £7.3bn, barely 75% of the minimum that the leading party of this very government implemented last year.

    On this basis we demand the closest action is taken to annulling of the delegated legislation and the government withdraws this statement. Additionally, statements should be made both by the FCO and HMT. We believe the latter should release the funds to DFID as necessary to meet the 0.5% spending commitment as enshrined in law. Further, the statement from the FCO should outline why such failures were there in the first place, why the SoS did not ensure the funds necessary were in the budget, and why the decision was then taken to reduce spending even further below the limit.

    [1] http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/...0150012_en.pdf
    [2] http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show...php?p=57718637
    [3] http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show....php?t=3843557
    [4] http://www.statista.com/statistics/2...uk-since-2000/
    [5] http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show....php?t=3892637
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Abstain. I still believe this is the case anyway - the relevant parts of the statement are just null and void.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    This is just a pointless rant against the government so my answer is nay.
    • Community Assistant
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Wiki Support Team
    Political Ambassador
    PS Reviewer
    Abstain - I think that the criticisms of the contravention of rules on DfID are dubious in their intent and I don't agree with arbitrary figures for international aid, but I do think that we have a duty to act in line with our obligations.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Quamquam123)
    This is just a pointless rant against the government so my answer is nay.
    If I murder somebody would you advocate no punishment?

    How about dodging tax to de - escalate it a bit?

    Or is law only relevant when it is somebody else?
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by toronto353)
    Abstain - I think that the criticisms of the contravention of rules on DfID are dubious in their intent and I don't agree with arbitrary figures for international aid, but I do think that we have a duty to act in line with our obligations.
    Whether you agree with the intentions, or the laws being broken, should the upholding of current law not be the important thing?
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    If I murder somebody would you advocate no punishment?

    How about dodging tax to de - escalate it a bit?

    Or is law only relevant when it is somebody else?
    So you are suggesting the government encourages murder? If so, that assumption is simply wrong.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Quamquam123)
    So you are suggesting the government encourages murder? If so, that assumption is simply wrong.
    Merely that it cares not for the law if it is they who broke it, and so far it almost looks as if you've all been told to not care about the law

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    I have voted in favour because of my view on the overseas aid budget and that it should not be cut. Though it could be distributed differently from at present.
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    Ayes to the right: 19
    Noes to the left: 16
    Abstain: 8

    The Ayes have it! The Ayes have it. Unlock.
    Turnout: 86%
 
 
 
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: March 8, 2016
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?
Useful resources

Articles:

Debate and current affairs forum guidelines

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.