Queue here for UK's £1bn foreign aid cashpoint: Just when you thought it couldn't get any worse... YOUR cash is doled out in envelopes and on ATM cards loaded with money

by Tommy Monk Thu Jan 05, 2017 11:14 pm

First topic message reminder :

Up to £300million spent on scheme in Pakistan, despite claims of corruption
Around 235,000 families pocket cash every three months to boost incomes
They get 4,500 rupees (£34.50) as part of Benazir Income Support Programme
Whitehall officials plan to expand scheme to 441,000 households by 2020
Standing in line, Pakistani families wait at a cashpoint used to withdraw money on cards loaded with funds from British taxpayers.

More than £1billion of our foreign aid budget has been given away in cash over the past five years, it can be revealed today.

Despite warnings of fraud, officials have quietly quadrupled expenditure on cash and debit cards that recipients can spend at will.

The budget has soared from £53million in 2005 to an annual average of £219million in the period 2011-15. MPs last night compared the foreign cash handouts to ‘exporting the dole’.

Around 235,000 families are pocketing payments every three months to boost their incomes, funded by UK taxpayers. Despite judging the scheme high risk, Whitehall officials plan to expand it to 441,000 Pakistani households by 2020.

The revelations fuelled calls from MPs for the Government to ditch the commitment to spend 0.7 per cent of national income on foreign aid.

Backbenchers have argued it is a scandal that so much is being spent abroad while elderly care in the UK is in crisis and town halls are threatening double-digit council tax hikes to close a funding gap.

Nigel Evans, a Tory MP who sits on the Commons international development committee, last night demanded an investigation into the £1billion cash handouts

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4082734/Queue-UK-s-1bn-foreign-aid-cashpoint-Just-thought-couldn-t-worse-cash-doled-envelopes-ATM-cards-loaded-money.html

WTF!?

by Eilzel Sun Jan 08, 2017 12:15 am

Giving money in foreign aid and helping 'our own' are not mutually exclusive. We can and should easily do both. Foreign aid accounts for 0.7% of govt expenditure. If a G8 nation cannot afford 0.7% to help developing nations then we have a problem.

Cutting tax avoidance loopholes would end any and all financial problems this country faces. Instead of attacking poor people in foreign countries or even the disabled and jobless in our own, we should be demanding the richest pay their fair share- but instead, as usual, the RW media stir the rabid minded against those who need help most.

by Guest Sun Jan 08, 2017 12:18 am

Eilzel wrote:Giving money in foreign aid and helping 'our own' are not mutually exclusive. We can and should easily do both. Foreign aid accounts for 0.7% of govt expenditure. If a G8 nation cannot afford 0.7% to help developing nations then we have a problem.

Cutting tax avoidance loopholes would end any and all financial problems this country faces. Instead of attacking poor people in foreign countries or even the disabled and jobless in our own, we should be demanding the richest pay their fair share- but instead, as usual, the RW media stir the rabid minded against those who need help most.

+1

by Tommy Monk Sun Jan 08, 2017 12:19 am

Tommy Monk wrote:

Uk taxpayers pay tax to uk govt for uk services... not to pay for Ethiopian girl bands or to top up Pakistanis cash cards for them to draw out our money and spend on whatever they want...

by Guest Sun Jan 08, 2017 12:20 am

Do they?

So none of this is based on trade with other countries then?

Again you are talking absolute nonsense.

Your argument is based on geography and very much racist.

As the point of giving money into a system is to help others

You wish to be selective over who gets that money based racially and geographically.

by Eilzel Sun Jan 08, 2017 12:22 am

So now you're going to use these two examples alone to support all arguments against foreign aid, Tommy?

Have you no interest in the root causes of our nation's economic problems?

^cheers Thorin, and nice to see you back!

by Tommy Monk Sun Jan 08, 2017 12:22 am

The point of the uk tax system is to run uk govt and uk public services...

by Guest Sun Jan 08, 2017 12:23 am

Eilzel wrote:So now you're going to use these two examples alone to support all arguments against foreign aid, Tommy?

Have you no interest in the root causes of our nation's economic problems?

^cheers Thorin, and nice to see you back!

Thanks mate

Cool

And congratulations on the admin role

by Eilzel Sun Jan 08, 2017 12:33 am

Thorin wrote:
Eilzel wrote:So now you're going to use these two examples alone to support all arguments against foreign aid, Tommy?

Have you no interest in the root causes of our nation's economic problems?

^cheers Thorin, and nice to see you back!

Thanks mate

And congratulations on the admin role

Cheers

^ tommy, again, no reason why it can't, and still give money to help the poor in other countries.

by Tommy Monk Sun Jan 08, 2017 12:41 am

British people don't want to be paying taxes to go towards funding millions £ to Ethiopian girl bands or to put hundreds of millions £ on cash cards of Pakistanis...

Demos kratos!!!

by Guest Sun Jan 08, 2017 12:47 am

Tommy Monk wrote:

British people don't want to be paying taxes to go towards funding millions £ to Ethiopian girl bands or to put hundreds of millions £ on cash cards of Pakistanis...

Demos kratos!!!

Is that why millions willingly give to charities already themselves?

You again think you speak for the majority, when you are just one of 62 million.

by Tommy Monk Sun Jan 08, 2017 12:49 am

When did either of the examples I gave ever get the consent of any of the voting public...!?

by Guest Sun Jan 08, 2017 12:53 am

Tommy Monk wrote:When did either of the examples I gave ever get the consent of any of the voting public...!?

Do you get consulted or asked to vote on how money is spent on the NHS?

No, mainly as the amount you pay in is pathetic, in the big scheme of things

by Eilzel Sun Jan 08, 2017 12:57 am

Tommy Monk wrote:When did either of the examples I gave ever get the consent of any of the voting public...!?

They are just two examples. Are two isolated incidences of misuse of money really worth spitting feathers about? Is it just this misuse you oppose? Or foreign aid as a whole?

And have you no interest in tackling the nations debt problems at root rather than scraping at the fringes of waste. Seriously, even cutting minor waste like this would do nothing to really help the NHS- your thinking is too small.

by Tommy Monk Sun Jan 08, 2017 1:09 am

There are many examples of misuse of public funds...

I am against all of them!

by Eilzel Sun Jan 08, 2017 1:23 am

So am I. But is there a wider point you are making here? Are you against all foreign aid?

by Tommy Monk Sun Jan 08, 2017 1:29 am

You define what you mean by 'foreign aid'... and then tell us how much of the £12billion a year actually goes to this...!?

Then I'll tell you whether I am in favour of £12 billion of uk taxpayers money going on 'foreign aid' or not...

by Major Sun Jan 08, 2017 4:53 pm

You can come up with all the fancy figuz you like but the fact remains it is OUR money for OUR OWN people.

When it comes to giving our money to forunuz anywhere the type of people I have heard to be pro giving it away are usually scroungers themselves.
People who have made a effort to support themselves and families do it for their familiez not for forunuz 1000s of miles away in some cases.
The incentive to graft gets diminished when scroungers get it gratis and mis-spend it.

by Guest Sun Jan 08, 2017 4:57 pm

Major wrote:You can come up with all the fancy figuz you like but the fact remains it is OUR money for OUR OWN people.

When it comes to giving our money to forunuz anywhere the type of people I have heard to be pro giving it away are usually scroungers themselves.
People who have made a effort to support themselves and families do it for their familiez not for forunuz 1000s of miles away in some cases.
The incentive to graft gets diminished when scroungers get it gratis and mis-spend it.

Our?

Your pitiful amount is pathetic really and does not make that money yours, but the nations collectively.
You do not own the money.
Your education was not something you brought about, but a system that grew off the back of subjugation and robbing nations. If the few innovative people that have advanced our understanding. Though as you do. You would still be using stone wheels to get around in

by Major Sun Jan 08, 2017 7:21 pm

Thorin wrote:
Major wrote:You can come up with all the fancy figuz you like but the fact remains it is OUR money for OUR OWN people.

When it comes to giving our money to forunuz anywhere the type of people I have heard to be pro giving it away are usually scroungers themselves.
People who have made a effort to support themselves and families do it for their familiez not for forunuz 1000s of miles away in some cases.
The incentive to graft gets diminished when scroungers get it gratis and mis-spend it.

Our?

Your pitiful amount is pathetic really and does not make that money yours, but the nations collectively.
You do not own the money.
Your education was not something you brought about, but a system that grew off the back of subjugation and robbing nations. If the few innovative people that have advanced our understanding. Though as you do. You would still be using stone wheels to get around in

WHY DOEST THOU, want to give OUR money to forunuz, some corrupt, at the expense of OUR OWN NEEDY??

ANSWER question please and do not try to evade or sidestep it.

by Guest Sun Jan 08, 2017 7:28 pm

Major wrote:
Thorin wrote:

Our?

Your pitiful amount is pathetic really and does not make that money yours, but the nations collectively.
You do not own the money.
Your education was not something you brought about, but a system that grew off the back of subjugation and robbing nations. If the few innovative people that have advanced our understanding. Though as you do. You would still be using stone wheels to get around in

WHY DOEST THOU, want to give OUR money to forunuz, some corrupt, at the expense of OUR OWN NEEDY??

ANSWER question please and do not try to evade or sidestep it.

Because we robbed these nations of their wealth and treated their people appallingly.
The money we give does not even begin to cover the money we owe them in today's equivalency of money
Money is also given to our own needy. So its not given over this countries needy either, which is a falsehood
Like I say, you would not have the position and money you have today with out the advantages that came from plundering these nations.
Also we are all one human species, so they are your needy to.
Your argument is based on geography

Night

by Tommy Monk Sun Jan 08, 2017 7:42 pm

What a complete load of bollocks!

by nicko Sun Jan 08, 2017 7:49 pm

I have to say for the nth time, I am not responsible for what my Father or Grandfather or any ancestor did, I am Me, I am responsible for what I DO.

by Guest Sun Jan 08, 2017 7:50 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:What a complete load of bollocks!

Is it?
Is that why you seem to have developed tourette syndrome?
The main reason for the above, is you cannot counter my ethical views.

by Guest Sun Jan 08, 2017 7:52 pm

nicko wrote:I have to say for the nth time, I am not responsible for what my Father or Grandfather or any ancestor did, I am Me, I am responsible for what I DO.

Nobody is saying you are, but you have benefited from this wealth stolen. This wealth allowed this country to progress rapidly and made it into the economic powerhouse it is today. None of the infrastructure, schools, hospitals etc would have been possible without this. So the monument you were born, you born into an advantage system , you did zero to create.

by Tommy Monk Sun Jan 08, 2017 8:32 pm

Bullshit!

by Guest Sun Jan 08, 2017 8:35 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:Bullshit!

tourette syndrome

by Tommy Monk Sun Jan 08, 2017 8:38 pm

No... just accurate observational descriptive noun to describe what you are talking...

by Guest Sun Jan 08, 2017 8:39 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:No... just accurate observational descriptive noun to describe what you are talking...

ad hominem

by Tommy Monk Sun Jan 08, 2017 8:41 pm

Ad nauseum...

by Guest Sun Jan 08, 2017 8:44 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:Ad nauseum...

Deflection

by Tommy Monk Sun Jan 08, 2017 8:55 pm

No... you're talking shit!!!

When did Britain ever control Ethiopia and rip them off for any wealth...!?

lol!

by Guest Sun Jan 08, 2017 9:03 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:No... you're talking shit!!!

When did Britain ever control Ethiopia and rip them off for any wealth...!?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Ethiopian_Agreement

So embarrassing your knowledge of British history and me a son of immigrants, knows more than you will hope to learn in a lifetime on British history

pirat

by Tommy Monk Sun Jan 08, 2017 9:06 pm

"...Ethiopia was never colonized by a European power, but was occupied by Italians in 1936..."

by Guest Sun Jan 08, 2017 9:07 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:

"...Ethiopia was never colonized by a European power, but was occupied by Italians in 1936..."

Who said it was colonized?

by Guest Sun Jan 08, 2017 9:08 pm

The terms of this agreement confirmed Ethiopia's status as a sovereign state, although the Ogaden region, the border regions with French Somaliland (known as the "Reserved Areas"), the Addis Ababa-Djibouti railroad, and the Haud, would remain temporarily under British control. The British also assumed control over currency and foreign exchange as well as imports and exports.

It also reconfirmed the Klobukowski agreement of 1906, which had exempted foreigners from both Ethiopian law and her justice system, as well as giving the British minister precedence over the other diplomatic missions to Ethiopia. Lastly, the agreement contained a clause which permitted the Ethiopians to end the agreement by giving three-months' notice.

The Ethiopians soon found the implementation of this agreement oppressive, although a slight improvement over the previous attitude of the British who treated Ethiopia as occupied enemy territory. As Haile Selassie describes one aspect of the prior relationship, "[The British] took all the military equipment captured in our country...openly and boldly saying that it should not be left for the service of blacks."^[3] Another point of contention was through British control of Ethiopia's banking and finance, which required all letters of credit to be opened in Aden and required all exports to be cleared through that port, yielding an official profit margin of 9-11%; in addition, all dollars earned by exports to the United States were required to be automatically converted to the British Pound.^[4]

by Tommy Monk Sun Jan 08, 2017 9:08 pm

The Anglo-Ethiopian Agreement was a joint effort between Ethiopia and the United Kingdom at reestablishing Ethiopian independent statehood following the ousting of Italian troops by combined British and Ethiopian forces in 1941 during World War II.

Oh dear dodge...

by Guest Sun Jan 08, 2017 9:10 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:The Anglo-Ethiopian Agreement was a joint effort between Ethiopia and the United Kingdom at reestablishing Ethiopian independent statehood following the ousting of Italian troops by combined British and Ethiopian forces in 1941 during World War II.

Oh dear dodge...

Oh dear in deed, it helps if you read on ha ha

The terms of this agreement confirmed Ethiopia's status as a sovereign state, although the Ogaden region, the border regions with French Somaliland (known as the "Reserved Areas"), the Addis Ababa-Djibouti railroad, and the Haud, would remain temporarily under British control. The British also assumed control over currency and foreign exchange as well as imports and exports.

It also reconfirmed the Klobukowski agreement of 1906, which had exempted foreigners from both Ethiopian law and her justice system, as well as giving the British minister precedence over the other diplomatic missions to Ethiopia. Lastly, the agreement contained a clause which permitted the Ethiopians to end the agreement by giving three-months' notice.

The Ethiopians soon found the implementation of this agreement oppressive, although a slight improvement over the previous attitude of the British who treated Ethiopia as occupied enemy territory. As Haile Selassie describes one aspect of the prior relationship, "[The British] took all the military equipment captured in our country...openly and boldly saying that it should not be left for the service of blacks."^[size=11][3] Another point of contention was through British control of Ethiopia's banking and finance, which required all letters of credit to be opened in Aden and required all exports to be cleared through that port, yielding an official profit margin of 9-11%; in addition, all dollars earned by exports to the United States were required to be automatically converted to the British Pound.^[4] [/size]

by Tommy Monk Sun Jan 08, 2017 9:13 pm

Hardly what you suggest happened that warrants the uk taxpayer funding of some Ethiopian girl band now...

by Guest Sun Jan 08, 2017 9:15 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:Hardly what you suggest happened that warrants the uk taxpayer funding of some Ethiopian girl band now...

Who is speaking about funding a girl band?

I am talking about funding aid to Ethiopians who need aid.

by Tommy Monk Sun Jan 08, 2017 9:18 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:

More funding madness revealed....

British taxpayers will no longer fund Ethiopia’s version of the Spice Girls.

Admitting foreign aid could be spent better elsewhere, ministers pulled the plug on the five-strong girl band last night.

The pop group Yegna initially received £4million as part of a wider programme aimed at empowering women in Ethiopia.

Despite warnings of public money being squandered a further £5.2million followed in 2015 for an initiative expected to run until at least 2018.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4095882/Britain-scraps-5million-foreign-aid-Ethiopia-s-Spice-Girls-Mail-revealed-blood-boiling-waste-taxpayers-money.html

From page 1 of this thread...

by Guest Sun Jan 08, 2017 9:21 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:

More funding madness revealed....

British taxpayers will no longer fund Ethiopia’s version of the Spice Girls.

Admitting foreign aid could be spent better elsewhere, ministers pulled the plug on the five-strong girl band last night.

The pop group Yegna initially received £4million as part of a wider programme aimed at empowering women in Ethiopia.

Despite warnings of public money being squandered a further £5.2million followed in 2015 for an initiative expected to run until at least 2018.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4095882/Britain-scraps-5million-foreign-aid-Ethiopia-s-Spice-Girls-Mail-revealed-blood-boiling-waste-taxpayers-money.html

From page 1 of this thread...

Who on here has supported a girl band getting aid money?

Nobody on here

by Tommy Monk Sun Jan 08, 2017 9:27 pm

So you agree that there are gross misuses of uk taxpayer funds into spurious foreign aid projects, and agree that this should be stopped immediately!?

by Guest Sun Jan 08, 2017 9:29 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:

So you agree that there are gross misuses of uk taxpayer funds into spurious foreign aid projects, and agree that this should be stopped immediately!?

I thought they have stopped funding this band?

So it has been stopped immediately and I agree that they should stop funding them

Talk about an irrelevant question

by Tommy Monk Sun Jan 08, 2017 9:33 pm

And you agree that uk taxpayer money should not be topping up Pakistanis cash cards in the way the op tells us...!?

by Guest Sun Jan 08, 2017 9:35 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:And you agree that uk taxpayer money should not be topping up Pakistanis cash cards in the way the op tells us...!?

What cash cards and what are they for?

by Tommy Monk Sun Jan 08, 2017 9:43 pm

Read the op...

All through this thread you have been defending the use of uk taxpayers cash in the 2 examples I have given...

Now you say you are against one of them (the funding of an Ethiopian girl band)... and also appear to not know anything about the other op example...!?

lol!

by Guest Sun Jan 08, 2017 9:46 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:Read the op...

All through this thread you have been defending the use of uk taxpayers cash in the 2 examples I have given...

Now you say you are against one of them (the funding of an Ethiopian girl band)... and also appear to not know anything about the other op example...!?

Incorrect, I have been defending giving foreign aid, which you argued against Cool

I never made claims on specific examples

I support the Pakistani scheme

by Tommy Monk Sun Jan 08, 2017 9:54 pm

This whole thread has been about specific examples...

Pakistanis should start paying their taxes and then they can top up their own peoples cash cards... it is not our responsibility... nor was this ever given consent of the british people...

by Guest Sun Jan 08, 2017 9:56 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:

This whole thread has been about specific examples...

Pakistanis should start paying their taxes and then they can top up their own peoples cash cards... it is not our responsibility... nor was this ever given consent of the british people...

Many are in poverty and this is certainly an area that was exploited by the British

Anyway it helps to understand why this scheme is so beneficial

Benazir Income Support Programme (BISP) was launched in July 2008 with an immediate objective of consumption smoothening and cushioning the negative effects of slow economic growth, the food crisis and inflation on the poor, particularly women, through the provision of cash transfers of Rs. 1,000/month to eligible families. Its long term objectives include supporting the achievement of Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) to eradicate extreme and chronic poverty, to empower of women and to achieve universal primary education. The monthly installment was enhanced to Rs. 1200/- per month w.e.f 1st July, 2013 by the present government and has now been fixed at Rs. 1500/-per month w.e.f 1st July, 2014.

Since its inception in 2008, BISP has grown rapidly; it is now the largest single social safety net program in Pakistan’s history. The number of beneficiaries has increased from 1.7 million households in FY 2008-9 to approximately 4.7 million as of 31st Dec, 2014 and BISP annual disbursements have risen from Rs. 16 billion in FY 2008-9 to Rs 65 billion in FY 2013-14. This FY, disbursements to beneficiaries is expected to reach Rs. 90 billion.

This period of growth and consolidation in BISP is characterized by two major transitions. In initial phase of BISP (2008-09 to 2010-11), beneficiaries were identified by parliamentarians while in 2010-11 a major transition occurred and poor households have been identified through a poverty scorecard survey based on household demographics, assets, and other measurable characteristics. The Nationwide Poverty Scorecard Survey, the first of its kind in South Asia, enables BISP to identify eligible households through the application of a Proxy Means Test (PMT) that determines welfare status of the household on a scale between 0-100. The survey was started in October 2010 and has been completed across Pakistan except in two agencies of FATA. The survey has the following features:

a. Creation of a large and reliable national registry of the socio-economic status of almost 27 million households across Pakistan
b. 7.7 million families are identified living below cut-off score of 16.17
c. GPS coordinates of all the household visited are available to map the data of the entire country

Benazir Smart Card and Mobile Phone Banking on test basis in nine districts across the country. After testing the pilots, BISP has rolled out Benazir Debit Card across Pakistan. Now, around 94% of the beneficiary household are receiving payments through technology enabled innovative payment mechanisms.

http://www.bisp.gov.pk/

by Tommy Monk Sun Jan 08, 2017 10:03 pm

Not for uk taxpayers to be paying.

Pakistanis should be paying for their own people by paying their proper taxes...

by Sponsored content