http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2864713/Now-Financial-Times-joins-call-rethink-aid-Paper-blasts-PM-s-vow-spend-billions-overseas.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490
Now Financial Times joins call for rethink on aid:
Paper blasts PM's vow to spend billions overseas
FT says it's right to question PM's ‘rigid’ target in current financial
state
Newspaper concluded that the aid budget had ‘little relevance’ today
Follows revelation UK will spend £1billon more on aid in next two years
By DANIEL MARTIN FOR THE DAILY MAIL
PUBLISHED: 17:19 EST, 7 December 2014 | UPDATED: 19:03 EST, 7 December 2014
Calls for a re-think of Britain’s controversial commitment to spend 0.7 per
cent of national income on foreign aid have received a substantial boost.
The influential Financial Times newspaper says the UK should focus on the
quality of projects rather than how much money is spent.
It said at the weekend that at a time of intense pressure on public
finances, it was right to question David Cameron’s ‘rigid’ target – an
argument made repeatedly by the Daily Mail.
The FT concluded that the target – first dreamed up in the 1960s – had
‘little relevance’ today and had been introduced by the Prime Minister to
help the Tories shed their ‘nasty’ image.
The FT’s stance follows the revelation last week that Britain will spend
£1billion more on foreign aid than expected over the next two years
following upward revisions to UK growth.
It will give a boost to many Tory backbenchers, who are unhappy that the
aid budget has been ring-fenced at a time when other elements of public
spending are being hugely pared back.
This year, £11.5billion was spent by the Department for International
Development on overseas aid – meeting the 0.7 per cent target.
The target is to be maintained in future years even though the Chancellor
has suggested public spending will fall to 35 per cent of GDP by 2020.
The FT said at the weekend that at a time of intense pressure on public
finances, it was right to question David Cameron’s ‘rigid’ target on
foreign aid
Critics have questioned whether many projects funded by overseas aid
represent value for money. (Huge billboard in the centre of the Ethiopian
capital Addia Ababa advertising British Aid funded girl band Yegna
Critics have questioned whether many projects funded by overseas aid
represent value for money.
Last year, it emerged UK taxpayers had picked up a £4million bill to fund
Ethiopia’s own Spice Girls, who released a string of videos that aimed to
empower women in the African country.
In its leader column, the FT said: ‘Britain spends £12billion a year on
overseas aid. This is a far larger sum than is disbursed by any other EU
state.
‘Among the world’s big nations, only the US spends more. It is hugely to
the credit of David Cameron’s government, and his Labour predecessors, that
Britain maintains a noble aspiration to assist the world’s poor.
+4
Peter Bone (pictured), Tory MP for Wellingborough, claimed ‘the Financial
Times are spot on'
‘But at a time of intense pressure on public finances, it is reasonable to
question the rigidity of the UK’s commitment to international development
spending.’
The paper pointed out the target was set 50 years ago by the World Council
of Churches.
‘Meeting it has helped to soften the Tories’ “nasty party” image; but in an
era of tight budgets it brings painful obligations,’ it said. ‘A particular
concern is that it wrongly puts the priority on the quantity of money that
Britain spends on aid rather than the quality of its projects.’
The aid has ‘certainly benefited’ the UK’s international reputation, the
paper concedes.
‘However, the doctrinaire commitment to the 0.7 per cent target should be
reconsidered. It is a number based on outdated growth models and has little
relevance today.’
The FT said that Britain wants to remain a major world power by spending 2
per cent of GDP on defence, at the same time as spending 0.7 per cent on
foreign aid and squeezing the full amount of public spending to 35 per cent.
‘Something has to give,’ it said.
Peter Bone, Tory MP for Wellingborough, said: ‘The Financial Times are spot
on. What is needed is to concentrate on quality, rather than making this
political gesture.’
Received on Sun Dec 07 2014 - 21:32:25 EST