Foreign Aid to be axed - BuzzJack Music Forum

BuzzJack - Entertainment Discussion _ General Discussion _ News and Politics

Latest Site News

Hozier climbs to number one

A chart double for Beyonce

Benson Boone remains at number one

2 Pages

1 2 >

Foreign Aid to be axed

Display modes

Track this thread - Email this thread - Print this thread - Download this thread - Subscribe to this forum

crazy chris View member profile	Aug 31 2020, 10:17 AM Post #1
BuzzJack Legend Joined: 7 March 2006 Posts: 22,001 User: 53	From The SUN https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/12540103/ ... rce=pushly FOREIGN aid is set to be axed to help foot the UK’s Covid-19 bill. Britain has a legal commitment to spend 0.7 per cent of its GDP on foreign projects. But Chancellor Rishi Sunak has indicated that the amount — up to £15billion a year — could be sacrificed to help plug the budget black hole caused by coronavirus. Instead, some money could be used to fund Foreign Office and Ministry of Defence projects, and invested in the charities sector. Rich countries such as China, led by President Xi Jinping, and India, have benefited from UK taxpayers’ cash. Foreign aid has included funding for dementia care in the Chinese province of Qingdao and yoga lessons for Indians at risk of heart failure. Mr Sunak believes he has the backing of the Prime Minister and Foreign Secretary for the big move. But they are all aware it will require primary legislation to come into effect, which could take months. Mr Sunak wants to use his November Budget to “announce the intention” to scrap it, multiple sources say. But ex-deputy PM Damian Green said the idea made him “wince”. The commitment to spend 0.7 per cent of GDP on foreign giveaways was a flagship policy of ex-PM David Cameron. This post has been edited by Crazy Chris: Aug 31 2020, 10:23 AM


Rooney View member profile	Aug 31 2020, 02:56 PM Post #2
WINTER IS COMING Joined: 7 March 2006 Posts: 45,595 User: 88	Personally I think it's a crap idea, the amount is miniscule in comparison and it does a lot of good, especially to far less developed countries. I get the need to help ourselves, but the money is unlikely to be re-invested back in to the country. You need to help other countries sometimes so to further the country's own agenda. Especially when the developing world is going to be absolutely battered by Covid.


Envoirment View member profile	Aug 31 2020, 03:07 PM Post #3
BuzzJack Platinum Member Joined: 21 November 2009 Posts: 8,541 User: 10,030	Not surprised. It'll likely poll well with the public as well.


Iz 🌟 View member profile	Aug 31 2020, 03:10 PM Post #4
I'm a paragon so don't perceive me Joined: 3 February 2011 Posts: 37,409 User: 12,929	What ludicrous cherry-picking to pick on India and China who are not in fact, free of poor people (also, Qingdao is not a province, jesus, the scum can't even get that right) and have so many levels of bureaucracy and different provincial needs it's not as simple to say they have a good economy therefore they can fix their problems. In any case the majority of our aid goes to places like Pakistan, Syria and Afghanistan. I wonder which Little Britain would prefer, giving these countries aid, or letting them collapse and creating more migrants. And completely with what Rooney says, it's not going to do a whole lot of good just going into a COVID debt hole.


crazy chris View member profile	Aug 31 2020, 03:33 PM Post #5
BuzzJack Legend Joined: 7 March 2006 Posts: 22,001 User: 53	Brilliant idea and I've been calling for this for ages. We're in a financial mess now so we need the money ourselves never mind sending it abroad. This has made my day in fact. Someone on another forum says it won't go through though as it's only a suggestion and not even the Tories are evil enough to axe foreign aid. This post has been edited by Crazy Chris: Aug 31 2020, 03:42 PM


Rooney View member profile	Aug 31 2020, 04:54 PM Post #6
WINTER IS COMING Joined: 7 March 2006 Posts: 45,595 User: 88	QUOTE(Crazy Chris @ Aug 31 2020, 04:33 PM) Brilliant idea and I've been calling for this for ages. We're in a financial mess now so we need the money ourselves never mind sending it abroad. This has made my day in fact. Someone on another forum says it won't go through though as it's only a suggestion and not even the Tories are evil enough to axe foreign aid. It's a good idea to the naked eye - let's keep our tax money in the country. But as Iz said if there's less stability in poorer countries it creates migrant problems that people are so against. So you might save yourself 0.7% of the budget but then it still angers everyone who is anti-immigration as it increases the risk. I don't even think we will end up being in that big of a financial mess. Perhaps all MPs should take a 10% temporary pay cut if we're going to be in that big of a mess?


Suedehead2 View member profile	Aug 31 2020, 05:15 PM Post #7
BuzzJack Legend Joined: 13 April 2007 Posts: 36,652 User: 3,272	QUOTE(Envoirment @ Aug 31 2020, 04:07 PM) Not surprised. It'll likely poll well with the public as well. That's all that counts with this dreadful shower of a government.


J00prstar View member profile	Aug 31 2020, 05:26 PM Post #8
there's nothing straight about plump Elvis Pronouns: they/any Joined: 21 January 2016 Posts: 13,130 User: 22,895	The Sun in twisting a story shocker. Isn't foreign aid mutual? Cutting connections with other countries seems like a misstep when the UK is about to very publicly cut ties with the rest of Europe already.


T Boy View member profile	Aug 31 2020, 05:29 PM Post #9
Radical Pink Troll Joined: 11 March 2006 Posts: 26,599 User: 177	QUOTE(Crazy Chris @ Aug 31 2020, 04:33 PM) Brilliant idea and I've been calling for this for ages. We're in a financial mess now so we need the money ourselves never mind sending it abroad. This has made my day in fact. Someone on another forum says it won't go through though as it's only a suggestion and not even the Tories are evil enough to axe foreign aid. What a surprise this is your opinion. If we need all the money for ourselves, why do we have multiple billionaires whilst people sleep on the streets? Saying we need to stop helping others to save ourselves might be a good argument until you consider how rich the very rich are in this country.


Doctor Blind View member profile	Aug 31 2020, 05:38 PM Post #10
#38BBE0 otherwise known as 'sky blue' Joined: 27 October 2008 Posts: 16,170 User: 7,561	Foriegn aid sums to about £15bn/year (0.7% of GDP) and less than 2% of total government expenditure. The welfare state costs around £155bn. Removing it will have a much greater impact on the UK's soft power (already decimated by Brexit), so if you want to accelerate the rapid decline into irrelevance on the world stage for the UK, then by all means...


TheSnake View member profile	Aug 31 2020, 05:59 PM Post #11
Say that hiss with your chest, and... Joined: 24 May 2016 Posts: 18,438 User: 23,308	I don't think it will be 'axed' forever though, even if Boris Johnson does win the next election. It will be just while the UK is in recession. QUOTE What a surprise this is your opinion. If we need all the money for ourselves, why do we have multiple billionaires whilst people sleep on the streets? Saying we need to stop helping others to save ourselves might be a good argument until you consider how rich the very rich are in this country. I do think Crazy Chris was making that point T Boy that he wanted to see it prioritized for homeless people and other people in financial hardship in this country to benefit from aid during these tough economic times over it being sent abroad. But yes that more to do with the welfare state Dr Blind was referring to. This post has been edited by TheSnake: Aug 31 2020, 06:04 PM


T Boy View member profile	Aug 31 2020, 06:14 PM Post #12
Radical Pink Troll Joined: 11 March 2006 Posts: 26,599 User: 177	QUOTE(TheSnake @ Aug 31 2020, 06:59 PM) I don't think it will be 'axed' forever though, even if Boris Johnson does win the next election. It will be just while the UK is in recession. I do think Crazy Chris was making that point T Boy that he wanted to see it prioritized for homeless people and other people in financial hardship in this country to benefit from aid during these tough economic times over it being sent abroad. But yes that more to do with the welfare state Dr Blind was referring to. I know exactly what he was saying, I don’t need an interpreter.


Suedehead2 View member profile	Aug 31 2020, 06:17 PM Post #13
BuzzJack Legend Joined: 13 April 2007 Posts: 36,652 User: 3,272	Technically, we will be out of recession at the end of next month as the third quarter will show a return to growth unless there is a new national lockdown in the next few weeks.


Doctor Blind View member profile	Aug 31 2020, 06:22 PM Post #14
#38BBE0 otherwise known as 'sky blue' Joined: 27 October 2008 Posts: 16,170 User: 7,561	QUOTE(Suedehead2 @ Aug 31 2020, 07:17 PM) Technically, we will be out of recession at the end of next month as the third quarter will show a return to growth unless there is a new national lockdown in the next few weeks. Indeed. That's a weak argument anyway because if we couldn't afford it, how an earth have we afforded around £70bn for the furlough scheme, £130bn to bail out the banks in 2008, £50bn+ for HS2 and over £50bn for the renewal of Trident - which if you wanted to ditch the UK's position on the world stage would be a much more intelligent saving.


Suedehead2 View member profile	Aug 31 2020, 08:48 PM Post #15
BuzzJack Legend Joined: 13 April 2007 Posts: 36,652 User: 3,272	I've always been broadly supportive of HS2 but it ought now to be reassessed. The main argument for it is not speed but capacity. That being the case, they need to revisit the estimated demand in light of the expected increase in working from home.


Steve201 View member profile	Aug 31 2020, 09:24 PM Post #16
Shakin Stevens Joined: 29 December 2007 Posts: 46,139 User: 5,138	THERE IS ENOUGH MONEY!! In decembers election Corbyn was told his nationalisation plans were all crazy dinosaur 1970s economics and yet when there's a pandemic all of a sudden the money is available proving these are always political choices not economic neccesity.


crazy chris View member profile	Aug 31 2020, 10:16 PM Post #17
BuzzJack Legend Joined: 7 March 2006 Posts: 22,001 User: 53	QUOTE(Steve201 @ Aug 31 2020, 10:24 PM) THERE IS ENOUGH MONEY!! Is there? Then why are there rumours tonight that Rishi intends a fuel hike of 5p which will cost drivers and firms delivering goods hundreds of pounds a year?


blacksquare View member profile	Aug 31 2020, 10:47 PM Post #18
BuzzJack Gold Member Joined: 25 July 2016 Posts: 4,364 User: 23,471	This seems like an ideological choice made because it'll poll well (eyeroll) and take some attention from a potential increase in corporation tax.


-0-0 View member profile	Aug 31 2020, 11:20 PM Post #19
🙄 Joined: 14 February 2010 Posts: 53,654 User: 10,643	QUOTE(T Boy @ Aug 31 2020, 07:14 PM) I know exactly what he was saying, I don’t need an interpreter. ? Why you speaking to snake like that for no reason what so ever?


T Boy View member profile	Sep 1 2020, 05:10 PM Post #20
Radical Pink Troll Joined: 11 March 2006 Posts: 26,599 User: 177	QUOTE(Wall @ Sep 1 2020, 12:20 AM) ? Why you speaking to snake like that for no reason what so ever? I wish you’d brought this up through pm or something given that it’s not relevant to the discussion at all and it shouldn’t be derailing the thread so I’m going to keep this as brief as possible. I responded in a way I saw fit. I don’t think my response is particularly rude. Snake seemed to be under the impression I couldn’t understand Chris’ point of view and I corrected him. Please message me if you still have an issue, I find it a bit odd you’ve offered no opinion on the topic yourself and appear to have come here just to stir.