SSTT
Tuesday 19th June 2012 5:21pm [Edited]
Southampton
1,548 posts
Quote: Lazzard @ June 19 2012, 3:29 PM BST
I just think that if the 'questionable' methods produce £1000, and the 'noble' method produces £10, there's a lot of sick babies who'd vote for the toffs and their black-tie dinners.
..but how much of the "questionable" method's £1000 reaches the 3rd world front line? Nobody knows, because once it arrives (minus expenses - heh) at its country of destination, it's untrackable. Most of it just "disappears".. and they arrange a photoshoot with foreign journalists in some arid villagescape in Uganda, where they've just dug a well and delivered some sacks of grain..
..whereas the "noble" method reaches the needy in its entirety. Trouble is, are there any "noble" people left?
Quote: Lazzard @ June 19 2012, 3:29 PM BST
Surely the only principle is how much aid is delivered?
See above.
Instead of passing the aid bucks to 3rd parties, the whole schtick of "UK foreign aid" should be restructured into a nationalised aid organisation that administers and delivers its bought goods and services direct to the front line. Imagine the organisation we could create, the jobs that would be created, with our annual aid budget of c.£7,800,000,000 (2010-11). That's £7.8 billion quid that we should be administering ourselves all the way to the front line, with our own bought goods, services, equipment and employees, not passing it on to ephemeral 3rd parties in 3rd world countries.
Stylee for President.