ChatterBank0 min ago
What Chance Do We Stand When Our International Development Secretary Gets It Wrong?
15 Answers
http:// www.tel egraph. co.uk/n ews/pol itics/1 0051539 /Justin e-Green ing-on- the-spo t-for-e nd-of-a id-clai m.html
/// Justine Greening, the International Development Secretary, said last month that direct assistance to the country would “come to an end”, and it was “currently worth £19 million a year”. ///
/// However the announcement related only to “bilateral aid” and did not mention the £116.4 million of “regional aid”, to be spent between now and March 2014, as well as a further £70.3 million committed for the following year. ///
There still seems plenty of money to throw about, even though some of 'our own' are queuing for food parcels and one unfortunate woman committed suicide because she could afford the extra 'Bedroom tax'.
/// Justine Greening, the International Development Secretary, said last month that direct assistance to the country would “come to an end”, and it was “currently worth £19 million a year”. ///
/// However the announcement related only to “bilateral aid” and did not mention the £116.4 million of “regional aid”, to be spent between now and March 2014, as well as a further £70.3 million committed for the following year. ///
There still seems plenty of money to throw about, even though some of 'our own' are queuing for food parcels and one unfortunate woman committed suicide because she could afford the extra 'Bedroom tax'.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.Gets it wrong? Not in politician's terms.
A statement like "We are ending the aid which is currently worth £19 million" [not her exact words, but the intended message] is a fine example of special pleading; true in itself, but deliberately misleading, like "I don't owe £50" to a claim for £50, when you owe £49. Politicians are good at these. Her department knew what was meant and intended; the words 'bilateral aid' in their statement is accompanied by an unspecified figure for 'regional aid',as though that was of no consequence.
A statement like "We are ending the aid which is currently worth £19 million" [not her exact words, but the intended message] is a fine example of special pleading; true in itself, but deliberately misleading, like "I don't owe £50" to a claim for £50, when you owe £49. Politicians are good at these. Her department knew what was meant and intended; the words 'bilateral aid' in their statement is accompanied by an unspecified figure for 'regional aid',as though that was of no consequence.
jno
/// uh, no, employers tend to be the main suppliers of most people's
money. ///
/// Exactly the same when the Government is your main supplier of money. ///
Now concentrate hard, if you can, the secret is in than little word, 'WHEN' in fact you must have know that when you yourself put, 'TEND' and 'MOST'.
/// uh, no, employers tend to be the main suppliers of most people's
money. ///
/// Exactly the same when the Government is your main supplier of money. ///
Now concentrate hard, if you can, the secret is in than little word, 'WHEN' in fact you must have know that when you yourself put, 'TEND' and 'MOST'.
It is not a tax, it is a reduction in benefit. The two are very different. That said, they probably feel about the same for people who are affected, but that doesn't change the fact that it is not a tax.
Returning to the main issue, what a surprise that another announcement by the present lot turns out to be bogus, misleading or almost a downright lie. Thanks for sharing.
Returning to the main issue, what a surprise that another announcement by the present lot turns out to be bogus, misleading or almost a downright lie. Thanks for sharing.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.