What's new

Fury over UK's 'unjustifiable' £98m foreign aid injection for India

Zeeraq

First Class Captain
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Runs
5,437
The UK is to hand over £98m to India despite the country - which has spent almost the same on a lunar probe - now giving out more foreign aid than it receives.

As part of the UK's aid budget, the Department for International Development (DfID) will give £52m this year and a further £46m in 2019/20.

It comes despite India spending £95.4m on the lunar probe, Chandrayaan-2, which is set to launch in January.

Meanwhile, India gives away more in foreign aid than it receives - in 2015/16 it took in £254m but gave away £912m.

Tory MP David Davies said India did not "want or need" UK aid and that "in effect we are sponsoring an Indian moon launch".

Another Tory MP, Phillip Davies, told the Daily Express: "Here we are spending money in a country that has not only got its own space programme but is developing its own overseas aid programme.

"To be honest, the government needs looking at if it thinks that is an appropriate way of spending taxpayers' money.

"It needs to get out of Whitehall and appreciate the public is not just sick and tired of this but angry too. It is completely unjustifiable and truly idiotic."

There is no suggestion that India, reportedly home to 230 million people who live in poverty, will use aid from the UK directly for its space programme.

The Chandrayaan-2 orbiter, which also sent a probe to the moon in 2008, will look to land a rover again and collect data from the start of next year.

In 2013, India launched an orbiter to Mars, which is still in operation.
More from India

DfID told the Daily Express "traditional" aid to India had ended and that it was now working to deliver joint economic development priorities.

It also said the money sent to India would "help stimulate prosperity, generate jobs, develop skills and open up new markets for both countries".

https://news.sky.com/story/fury-over-uks-unjustifiable-98m-foreign-aid-injection-for-india-11489332
 
Colonialism aside, how does India donate a billion dollars in aid yet can't eradicate poverty in their own country?

I'm genuinely curious, like they could spend on their own citizens. This just seems so wasteful and unintelligent from the indian government.
 
a lot of foreign aid is spent on keeping business ties going - as over the years it more beneficial for England than completely losing out on industries.

People who keeping using the poverty card - need to drop this as you know why every country in the world has poverty and wants/needs poverty to exist - as poverty is profit for all the big companies.
 
Colonialism aside, how does India donate a billion dollars in aid yet can't eradicate poverty in their own country?

I'm genuinely curious, like they could spend on their own citizens. This just seems so wasteful and unintelligent from the indian government.

All aid is investment/consolidation wrt global political clout/trade interests. India is fighting hard to keep its interests alive in the global arena where China is already and since a long time investing aggressively. Many Chinese companies have started setting bases in Africa which is emerging as the next cheap labour/low tax manufacturing destination. India is also following although not at China's level. Afghanistan is important too wrt India's geolpolitical interests in the region. There is no free lunch.

It is naive to think eradicating poverty is ever a priority.
 
Colonialism aside, how does India donate a billion dollars in aid yet can't eradicate poverty in their own country?

Because the word 'aid' is a misnomer. It's a glorified bribe to get political and military favours.

Have a look at the hissy fit the same UK raised when they were asked to STOP said aid back when the Rafale was chosen over the Eurofighter in 2012 or so.
 
Because the word 'aid' is a misnomer. It's a glorified bribe to get political and military favours.

Have a look at the hissy fit the same UK raised when they were asked to STOP said aid back when the Rafale was chosen over the Eurofighter in 2012 or so.
The aid is sent through NGOs unless you think these NGOs are frauds and just a front for making corrupt payments?
 
The aid is sent through NGOs unless you think these NGOs are frauds and just a front for making corrupt payments?

No. But the donor then arm twists the recipient - we fund xyz in your country, now look at us favorably when it comes to trade deals.

India has been telling the UK that they don't want to receive aid for years:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/india/9061844/India-tells-Britain-We-dont-want-your-aid.html

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/we-don-t-need-foreign-aid-money-says-indian-envoy-jlb5h27kj
 
You would be surprised.

Then enlighten me.

UK Aid is given on programs... there is an open competitive process for charities to apply for this money. There will be terms and conditions attached and then an audit.
 
Then enlighten me.

UK Aid is given on programs... there is an open competitive process for charities to apply for this money. There will be terms and conditions attached and then an audit.

You might find this article useful:

IS ‘FOREIGN AID’ A PHRASE FOR INTERNATIONAL BRIBERY?

This so-called ‘foreign aid’ will never be stopped until it is exposed for what it really is: mass bribery.

The bankers, Nato, The UN, and the globalist elite use these enormous bribes around the world in order to get things done the way they want to do it and disguise the payments as ‘foreign aid’.

https://bnp.org.uk/foreign-aid-bribery/
 
China is giving aid to Africa but for some reason when they do it, it is described as debt colonialism.

‘Debt colonialism’ fears as China puts $60bn into Africa

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/...s-as-china-ploughs-60bn-into-africa-j0r9gltr6

China has pledged $60 billion in loans and investments in Africa, strengthening its grip on the continent in a show of financial firepower and strategic intent.

The package, announced by President Xi at a gathering of African leaders, includes loans, credit lines and direct investment as well as a commitment to write off some debt owed by the poorest nations.
 
when UK gives aid to commonwealth nations it should be described as colonialism debt.

UK should perhaps shift the aid focus to Pakistan which, as a failing nation may benefit more from the charity surplus which Britain is keen to distribute. It could only help cement Britain's reputation for selflessly building up their former colonies to reflect the glory of empire.
 
You don’t repay aid payments, not the same with Chinese debt

There is always some form of repayment, if not ostensibly in cash, then there will be other conditions attached. It's still a form of debt, that is why you have countries like India trying to move away from it, and our UK saying, go on, take it anyway, we insist.
 
The diplomatic incident came as Ms Payne urged China to heed guidelines set by Australia in the way it delivered aid to the Pacific. According to Australia’s Lowy Institute think tank, China provided US$1.78 billion in aid, including soft loans, to Pacific nations between 2006 and 2016.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/world/china-walks-out-of-pacific-summit-in-nauru-679cwglrm

Loans being described as aid right there, but then I suppose these journalists are less concerned about playing with words and are instead making a point with regard to the bigger picture.
 
I don't mind paying for this as a tax payer so long they use the money to build toilets and make equality / anti-sexual assault courses mandatory for every citizen.
 
UK can stop its foreign aid but just return the stolen goods from India.

The UK is no more a colonial power since more than half-a-century, and has somehow redeemed itself by welcoming immigrants from their ex-colonies by the millions, who enjoy the benefits of living in a first-world country, conditions elusive in their homeland.
 
The UK is no more a colonial power since more than half-a-century, and has somehow redeemed itself by welcoming immigrants from their ex-colonies by the millions, who enjoy the benefits of living in a first-world country, conditions elusive in their homeland.

Some former British colonies are developed countries while some are emerging economies. Some are such big economies that UK is desperate to get trade deals there. Some countries are buying UK companies and hiring UK citizens by 1000s.

Not every country is struggling with security issues, IMF bailouts, being put on blacklists etc.Dont generalise other countries based on your own.
 
Last edited:
The UK is no more a colonial power since more than half-a-century, and has somehow redeemed itself by welcoming immigrants from their ex-colonies by the millions, who enjoy the benefits of living in a first-world country, conditions elusive in their homeland.

So now looting other countries get justified by welcoming immigrants?
 
Back
Top