By Imnokuffar-The people of Britain have been ‘volunteered’ by their government to spend 0.7% of its GDP (Gross Domestic Product) on Foreign Aid.
This year we are spending, (or throwing away) £8.1 billion per annum on foreign aid that will increase to £12 billion in 2014 — a 34 per cent rise, despite spending cuts elsewhere.
This amounts to an additional tax on each household of £300 each year and will rise as the ‘contributions’ rise.
These involuntary contributions are a scandal as British people are already the most generous in the world giving £4 billion per annum through voluntary charitable donations.
When this department (DFID) was set up in 1997 by the Blair government its budget was £2.6 billion, proof if proof were needed that this department is totally out of control.
Britain pays more in foreign aid than France, Germany or any of the other G8 countries – all of whom agreed to pay the same amount pro-rata as Britain (0.7%) but somehow managed to avoid paying it.
A G8 report found that while other countries have failed to match pledges to raise international aid payments made at the Gleneagles summit in 2005 the UK last year spent 0.56 per cent of GDP on foreign aid – double the G8 average of 0.28 per cent.
For instance we pay nearly 3 times as much as Canada (that has a bigger economy than ours), Sweden (ditto) and Spain. Below I set out the figures for foreign aid from various countries.
You will immediately notice that the United Kingdom gives half as much as the US that has an economy of roughly 9 Trillion dollars per year as opposed to the UK that has an economy of £1.1 trillion per year.
To say this is insane is to underestimate the lunacy of this situation.
Rank Countries Amount
# 1 United States: $23,530,000,000.00
# 2 United Kingdom: $12,460,000,000.00
# 3 France: $10,600,000,000.00
# 4 Germany: $10,440,000,000.00
# 5 Japan: $7,500,000,000.00
# 6 Netherlands: $5,452,000,000.00
# 7 Sweden: $3,955,000,000.00
# 8 Canada: $3,900,000,000.00
# 9 Spain: $3,814,000,000.00
# 10 Italy: $3,641,000,000.00
The first thing to say is that if you ask the vast majority of people whether we should be spending any money at all on foreign aid the answer would be an unqualified “no”.
These people are not BNP members or “possibly hard-hearted’ as Cameron has implied in one of his many fatuous statements.
They are just ordinary people who think it is absolutely stupid and criminally negligent to be spending money abroad on projects when we should be utilizing it for the benefit of OUR people.
But why would all these ‘possibly hard hearted’ people oppose foreign aid?
Well, firstly because some view it as “A transfer of wealth from poor people in rich countries to rich people in poor countries” as the saying goes.
In other words they see it as being intrinsically corrupt and corrupting. Whilst some may not understand this intellectually they certainly understand it instinctually.
The very term ‘aid’ implies that this money is given to assist people whereas very often it does not – in fact it does the opposite. It has permitted such startling anomalies as Western aid to rich oil-producing countries; to virulently anti-Western governments; to totalitarian regimes; to countries at war with each other; and to governments which have pursued policies of large-scale persecution, expulsion and discrimination.
There are arguments that aid does not benefit the poor because the money goes to the rulers and they dispense it as they see fit, discriminating between those who are deemed worthy and those who are not; all the while pocketing vast amounts of this ‘aid’ for themselves.
So from this perspective aid actually increases corruption, dissention within societies and does nothing for development as the recipients may become dependent upon it.
Aid can also retard a nations development because if you are giving stuff away then those who produce these things (food for instance) even if it is in small quantities are chased from the market.
They are in effect put out of business by the very aid that was meant to assist them.
For almost half a century the countries of Africa have been awash in aid. Hundreds of billions of dollars have been given to African governments. More billions were lent to these same governments.
Countless tons of food has inundated the continent, and swarms of consultants, experts, and administrators have descended to solve Africa’s problems.
Yet the state of development in Africa is no better today than it was when all this started. Per capita income, for most of Africa, is either stagnant or declining.
Unless of course you are the ones dispensing this ‘aid’.
The misuse and corruption of aid is legendary and not just by the recipients but by the donors who quietly fund corrupt regimes knowing full well the money is not going where it is intended.
Probably everyone reading this has a story they remember about aid and corruption; here is a good example. I got this report just by tapping in “Aid Corruption” on Google.
“BEING attacked on Fox News was probably the worst, but all the past month has been horrid for the Global Fund to fight Aids, Tuberculosis and Malaria, backed by $20 billion and one of the world's biggest do-gooding outfits.
Set up in 2002, it is used to appreciative coverage of its efforts to stamp out three of the deadliest diseases.
The unexpected woes started with an Associated Press story entitled “Fraud plagues global health fund” on January 23rd.
It claimed that up to two-thirds of some grants went astray, with “astonishing” corruption in some cases. It cited faked invoices, phoney training events and other abuses, chiefly involving health ministries in some African countries.
For Fund insiders, that was nothing new: evidence of the misuse of $34m paid out in Mali, Mauritania, Djibouti and Zambia became public knowledge in October.
The fund's staff argued that the source was their own investigations (albeit of a small chunk of the billions it has distributed). Perhaps self-servingly, the fund's fans argued that a tiny loss to corruption counted almost as a success given the problems that beset other aid efforts”
An argument that is often used is that aid benefits the givers as well as the recipients because it increases Third World purchasing power and hence exports and employment in the West. This is just plain sophistry.
Exports bought with foreign aid are given away. It is to say that people who give away money must be better off because those whom they have helped will be better off and so will buy more from their beneficiaries.
A shopkeeper does not prosper by giving away his cash to people some of whom may later spend a part of it in his shop.
Then we come to Cameron’s reasoning if it can be called such.
He thinks that foreign aid reduces terrorism by tackling poverty, unemployment and the like. What he fails to understand is that Islamic terrorism has nothing to do with aid or lack of it.
Islamic terrorism is an ideological construct that is promoted in the Koran. You cannot simply buy these people off by giving them aid when they want is conquest, domination and the subjugation of the Kuffar.
What Cameron sees as aid the Muslims see as Jizyia (a tax on the Kuffar) and in their understanding they are entitled to it anyway as they think they are superior to the donors.
Let us move on to why we should scrap foreign aid from a domestic point of view. In the chancellors speech to the Tory party conference he said that he wants another cut in public expenditure of £10 billion (he later upped that to £13 billion).
From a logical point of view why should we give £8.1 billion away this year when he wants domestic cuts of £10 billion?
The civil service is being cut, local government is being cut, and the Border Agency is being cut.
Major infrastructure projects are being delayed or not carried out at all. The railways are in a mess, the Health Service is being cut (by stealth), there is mass unemployment, and the country is in massive debt.
Our pensioners freeze to death in the winter, our schools are underfunded and even our troops face a pay cut;
“Thousands of soldiers who have just returned from Afghanistan could face a 10 per cent pay cut as the Ministry of Defence looks to save as much as £4million.
Army chiefs want to cut the number of soldiers in the Parachute Regiment who receive a £2,000-a-year supplement. Known as the Para Pay bonus, the £180-a-month supplement is paid to all members of the Armed Forces who are trained to parachute.
Currently all members of the Parachute Regiment’s 16 Air Assault Brigade learn how to parachute, including engineers, artillery experts and medics, as well as soldiers.
It means 4,756 soldiers currently get the supplement because of the specialist training, but the MoD wants to cut that number so they can avoid paying the bonus.
The wage cut has already been agreed by army chiefs, but the number of soldiers it is likely to affect has not been decided.
However, some sources have suggested as many as 4,000 could lose the bonus, hitting privates who earn little more than £12,000 a year, after tax, the hardest.”
Essentially we are borrowing money to give to other countries some of whom have their own space programmes and others who are so corrupt that you may as well take the money and give it directly to the crooks in government, thus cutting out the middle man and avoiding pretence.
However this government, in the teeth of all rational arguments has decided to keep on with this irrational, lunatic and criminally irresponsible policy whilst OUR people suffer.
The ONLY PARTY that will stop this is the British National Party.
Think on what I have written here; if you decide it is correct, then act and JOIN US.