British and EU overseas aid.

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.telegraph....ealthy-countries.html

While Britain and most of Europe are suffering cut-backs after cut-backs, the overseas aid coffers are spewing money out on ridicules projects to some of the World's richest nations, among them China, Russia, Brazil, Iceland and Barbados.

/// * Brazil, which will spend £9 billion on the Olympics in 2016, received more than £10 million in European aid for schemes including £660,000 spent on the social integration of women living in fishing communities and £120,000 on the 'integration of indigenous city dwellers’. ///

/// Russia, with more than 100 billionaires, was given £40 million, including £240,000 for an arts project in St Petersburg. ///

/// Iceland, a country officially wealthier than the UK and which refuses to re-pay £2.3 billion owed to Britain in the credit crunch, receives about £4.2 million including £400,000 for a scheme to promote tourism in Katla national park; ///

/// Argentina, one of the G20 major economies and whose relations with the UK remain strained over the Falklands, was earmarked £9.5 million in aid. ///

/// Turkey, whose economy enjoyed one of the fastest growth rates in 2011, but was the biggest recipient of EU aid with £620 million pledged in 2011. Projects including funding for a television series about the EU. ///

And then there is Barbados,

http://www.telegraph....pent-in-Barbados.html

Can this be right?

[FredPuli43]

No, not in the examples chosen. One argument put forward is that some aid to India and Pakistan is applied to education and that that stops children from being becoming our enemies. 'Yeeeeeeees', as Paxman would say.

None of the countries cited are in the EU. It's understandable that the EU makes grants to member states to improve their infrastructure or develop their economies.

[bazwillrun]

Its almost farcical beyond belief tha we are dishing out money left right and centre to these or any countries for that matter under the current economical climate.

Every penny we give away could be used to benefit citizens in this country in all sorts of ways, and its our country and its citizens that should take priority

[anotheoldgit]

/// One argument put forward is that some aid to India and Pakistan is applied to education and that that stops children from being becoming our enemies. ///

And yes their hate the British teachers are going to instruct their pupils to love us???????????

[youngmafbog]

It is now getting beyond a joke. Cameron is just an idiot, I really dont know what he is playing at. We need to be out of the EU and creating our own wealth (yes Jake we can do it) withouth this rediculous waste on top of the red tape etc.
On top of this
1) We still have hundreds of Quangos that were supposed to go
2) We are dishing out millions to foreigners who want bigger and bigger houses on the state - and we give it them !
3) We keep hate preachers and their followers on the State and a racist if we object
4) Clegg (dick head Extraordinaire) blocks a reduction in MPs (more state money over his tantrum
5) People who saved and scrimped through life are rewarded by the State taking their wealth should they fall ill (Ordinarly blue collar workers I am talking about)

And what do Cable and Clegg want to do, hey tax us all even more for working hard. and has Cameron come out saying that wont happen? Not heard a peep have we.

This Country has gone to the dogs. Seriously considering getting out myself.

[pdq1]

Its because we're lied to about the purposes of some foreign aid. Offering aid is a way of getting the foot in the door of those countries to influence their policy. Russia knew all about this years ago and in fact kicked the SFOs out of the country and called them spies and infiltrators.

Many of them are really linked to the F.O. and there was some talk recently that DFID should be absorbed into the Foreign Office.

[pdq1]

You can't keep this feller out of the news but its not really about him

http://www.independen...n-office-1232054.html

[ichkeria]

"ts because we're lied to about the purposes of some foreign aid. Offering aid is a way of getting the foot in the door of those countries to influence their policy. Russia knew all about this years ago and in fact kicked the SFOs out of the country and called them spies and infiltrators. "

In the case of Russia (which I believe has has its foreign aid from Britain - a different issue to the EU funding one - cut) the "policy influence" thing is nonsense. It's long been a tactic of oppressive Russian administrations to persecute foreign institutions and individuals on grounds of "meddling" and "infiltration". This is partly down to playing on people's natural xenophobia, and partly a genuine belief that it is the case (a case of judging others by their own standards).

[pdq1]

Error above: not SFO....should be NGOs But article still applies. Russia thought rightly or otherwise they were trying in fluence policy. Also applied to the yanks.

http://www.independen...n-office-1232054.html

[ichkeria]

The article of course concerns a Tory complaining about the perceived influence of the DFID a year before the last election. I don't think it's relevant to Russian allegations about foreign NGOs.

[pdq1]

///USAid covertly influencing political processes, says Russia
Monday, September 24, 2012 - 16:15
RUSSIA has accused the US of using its aid agency in Moscow to covertly influence the country’s politics and elections, explaining its decision to expel the mission amid a wider crackdown on the opposition movement.

The Russian government has given the United States Agency for International Development (USAid) until Oct 1 to cease all operations in the country.The agency helps fund a number of pro-democracy and human rights groups that have provoked the Kremlin’s wrath amid an unprecedented opposition movement against the President Vladimir Putin.

In an uncharacteristically blunt statement, the Russian foreign ministry said that the decision to shut USAid was taken primarily because the agency’s work “does not always correspond to (its) stated goals”.

“This means attempts to exert influence, via the distribution of grants, upon political processes, including elections of various levels and institutions of civil society,” it said.

Putin has accused the US state department of orchestrating the mass protests that have swept Moscow since he announced his intention to run for the presidency again late last year.

A main target of his ire has been Golos, an independent election monitoring group that receives the bulk of its funding from USAid and was key in exposing electoral fraud in a December parliamentary vote that helped bring tens of thousands of protesters on to the streets.

The foreign ministry also expressed its displeasure with the agency’s work in the troubled North Caucasus, a region still wracked by the remnants of a violent Islamist insurgency.

“USAid’s activity in the Russian regions, especially the North Caucasus, prompted serious questions, which we warned our American colleagues about repeatedly,” the statement said.

USAid has been operating in Russia since the Soviet Union’s collapse, funding groups that have received little or no government support, including medical NGOs devoted to fighting HIV/Aids and tuberculosis and various environmental groups.///

[ichkeria]

And you seriously believe that?

[pdq1]

Amazing this article is hot off the press .....only hours old!

[ichkeria]

If you mean the US Aid story, it's last week's news.
And actually this isn't really addressing aog's original question, to which I'll reply by saying that I think it's good in principle that funding is available via the EU for various projects. Of course, it may be that some are more worthy causes than others.
As for the credentials of the rulers of some of these countries. they are very suspect in a lot of cases. Putin is one of the world's richest men, wealth largely accumulated by siphoning the proceeds of large Russian state-owned companies, but does that mean that an arts project in his native St Petersburg should not be funded by EU tax payers? I don't have a ready answer to that I'm afraid.

[emmie]

we shouldn't be funding anyone, the money is desperately needed here. I would rather they hadn't shut some of our libraries, closed any number of mental health centres, youth clubs, and old age pensioners community centres, because this all has a terrible knock on effect. More children/youths on the streets, no where to go, some behaving badly. pensioners who can't get out, often needing carers. libraries are not just for lending of books but meeting places too. And the ramifications of the closure of mental health centres is all around me, and as they say i could write a book about that.

[pdq1]

Icheria it is part of the overall question. We want to know where the aid money goes and why. We know where it goes but often do no know the reason. By getting NGOs involved in many countries it gives a clue how we can give money to places like India and Russia.

[ichkeria]

A few issues are getting confused here. Some of the aid referred to in the Sunday Telegraph article is direct aid from the UK. Some apparently is cultural grant aid via the EU. Then we have the nonsense spouted by Putin about NGOs, which in all honesty sheds no light on anything. As a matter of fact when it comes to aid to Russia and India aid to the former from the UK is to or has ceased while aid to the latter is to be or has been frozen.
Lots of the aid targets are I am sure dubious and no doubt many more are worthwhile.