suspend our overseas aid and spend the money in Ireland

P. Breathnach

TomRooney wrote: »

the "FAMINE" was actualy an attempt at ethnic cleansing by the british, you dont realy believe all the irish people ate was potatoes do you...?

the british took every scrap of food and livestock out of Ireland to feed there colonial armys.
resulting in the mass starvation of our people, which was convineintly and decietfully put down to a widespread potato crop failure

I see you know as much about the famine as you know about fishing.

noodler

The role of EU funds may have been overemphaised over the years but it did play a part.

Alot of the infrastructure we have now has been part (mostly) paid for by the EU.

I'd argue actual membership was more important but to say the EU funds played absolutely no part is lunacy.

ynotdu

TomRooney wrote: »

what you spout here is absolute tripe, if you want to give the EU credit for a 10 year boom, then you must also attribute the other 25 years of absolute poverty to them you cant pick and choose.

the reason there was a construction boom, is simply because Ireland had a highly skilled workforce and needed housing, the US is more to thank than the EU, the USA IT industry invested heavily in Ireland in the early 90`s. Ireland has gas reserves of the west coast estimated at Millions of sqaure meteres worth of natural Gas, we have hundreds of miles of pristine water for fishing, we have mines that give us all types of ore, we have clay to make blocks and bricks, not every country has these assets

the EU has purely selfish interests in Ireland. you will see in the future.

We do agree on one thing though the E.U Does have Many selfish reasons for why they pumped money in here,Another export market for them&begob&begorrah Didnt the Yanks Only LOVE us !

ynotdu

P. Breathnach wrote: »

I see you know as much about the famine as you know about fishing.

Oh Lord am I in some kind of trouble :eek:
I only eat spuds boo hoo
moderator just told Me I am a blight on the site:)

ArphaRima

An independent apolitical media, a more educated population, international audits, open elections and a good communications platform in the country.

Absolutely 100% agreed.
However we are not sending aid to Switzerland. Sub-saharan Africa I suspect gets the vast majority of our aid.

I guess in my experience what I saw in poorer countries was a ready and able populace held to ransom by shoddy undemocratic politics, educational glass ceilings, cronyism, and controlled media. The primary way people could get ahead was to cheat. At least that's how it looked to everyone. So they all did it. Mind-boggling, unbelievable scams, schemes and plotting. It took a hell of a lot of effort though so it was like an economy in itself.

My landlord earned 100 dollars a month in pay. He owned a number of mansions worth millions. He was a police officer. That is just an example.
My examples of emergency Bird Flu funds and SE Asia Tsunami funds being misappropriated into private hands are really what concerns me here.

Generally my point being; many of these countries have real resources. Be they the people, the land, the gold/oil/diamonds/seas or trees. They are willing to work. Each person I met was spending a massive proportion of their wages on their kids education. (maybe Africa is different, I dont know)
I feel that our money could be better served in stamping out systemic corruption and allowing these countries to grow out of poverty themselves.
Of course you work in the educational sector so I think you understand this argument.

Yes aid programmes like emergency food supplies should still be funded.
But I believe a far reaching well funded anti-corruption programme (at an EU or UN level) could have far better effect in the medium and certainly long term.

deadhead13

TomRooney wrote: »

the "FAMINE" was actualy an attempt at ethnic cleansing by the british, you dont realy believe all the irish people ate was potatoes do you...?

the british took every scrap of food and livestock out of Ireland to feed there colonial armys.
resulting in the mass starvation of our people, which was convineintly and decietfully put down to a widespread potato crop failure

TomRooney wrote: »

what you spout here is absolute tripe, if you want to give the EU credit for a 10 year boom, then you must also attribute the other 25 years of absolute poverty to them you cant pick and choose.

the reason there was a construction boom, is simply because Ireland had a highly skilled workforce and needed housing, the US is more to thank than the EU, the USA IT industry invested heavily in Ireland in the early 90`s. Ireland has gas reserves of the west coast estimated at Millions of sqaure meteres worth of natural Gas, we have hundreds of miles of pristine water for fishing, we have mines that give us all types of ore, we have clay to make blocks and bricks, not every country has these assets

the EU has purely selfish interests in Ireland. you will see in the future.

Sounds like someone has been hanging around the Conspiracy Theories forum too much.

r0nanf

TomRooney wrote: »

the reason there was a construction boom, is simply because Ireland had a highly skilled workforce and needed housing

I can safely say that when I go, I will go having heard everything. Sounds like a Department of Finance spokesperson to me...

edanto

fluffer wrote: »

I feel that our money could be better served in stamping out systemic corruption and allowing these countries to grow out of poverty themselves.
---
Yes aid programmes like emergency food supplies should still be funded.
But I believe a far reaching well funded anti-corruption programme (at an EU or UN level) could have far better effect in the medium and certainly long term.

Our aid money is being spent on that. Well some of it is. If you're looking for the jargon terms, you might call one type of work 'emergency relief' and the other 'development'.

Of course 'development' is quite a subjective term and people in Africa have laughed at me when I used it, but as a shorthand it's useful.

There is, in Irish Aid, a split between money spent on emergency relief and that spent on programmes to raise the standard of living through education, sanitation, healthcare, agriculture etc. I have some notes on the Education initiatives in Uganda for example if you'd like to PM me.

Of course you're absolutely right that corruption is despicable.

here's one of the first google hits...I've no idea what it is but the contents look relevant to what you're interested in.
http://www.unodc.org/documents/corruption/publications_toolkit_sep04.pdf

Barname

P. Breathnach wrote: »

That is one of the ugliest posts I have seen in this forum.

so challenge it.

save the drama for your momma

What NGO do you leach off of?

D6 NGO professionals and their mock horror.

Barname

ynotdu wrote: »

plenty of truth in what You say but dont tar all with the same brush,Many are brave&Idealistic,We dont want to lose that do we ?

My sweeping generalisations apply 95% of the time.

There is a massive rot at the core of the machinations of charities worldwide.

Charity begins in your OWN community, if Humanity was capable of living by that the World would be much improved.

I have stopped 2 standing orders to well known charities because I am sick of hearing their ads on the radio. These ads are NOT free and I feel that my money is wasted on marketing campaigns.

My money now stays in my community.

I note that the self protecting charidee net surfers on here have declined to even comment on my proposal with respect to Water delivery schemes.

Slash the overheads Leaches.

oscarBravo

Barname wrote: »

My sweeping generalisations apply 95% of the time.

For which statistic you have reliable sources, no doubt?

I have stopped 2 standing orders to well known charities because I am sick of hearing their ads on the radio. These ads are NOT free and I feel that my money is wasted on marketing campaigns.

You think charities should rely on telepathy to communicate their message?

I note that the self protecting charidee net surfers on here have declined to even comment on my proposal with respect to Water delivery schemes.

Perhaps you should spend more time reading than mouthing off.

Slash the overheads Leaches.

Lose the attitude.

ArphaRima

What NGO do you leach off of?

D6 NGO professionals and their mock horror.

Barname have you ever been outside of Europe or North America?

I dont think you've ever seen poverty. Because n Irish working class family is NOT in poverty. Anybody using that word uses it relatively only.

Slash the overheads Leaches.

Agreed. But the money has to get FROM here TO there. That means there must be someone on this side.
To give money to somebody you have to know they exist. That means advertising. Advertising isnt free. There is a cost/benefit alalysis done I'm sure as to whether they are marketing to the right demographic using the right medium.

My sweeping generalisations apply 95% of the time.

They certainly do not. Definitively.

ynotdu

edanto wrote: »

Irish Times - Wed 05 May 2007
Native Americans remember Irish famine donation
Descendants of a native American tribe who raised funds for Irish famine victims visited Ireland this week, rekindling an unlikely relationship forged 160 years ago.In 1847 a group of impoverished Choctaw native Americans collected $710 and sent it to a famine relief fund for Ireland.



Because people living in poverty need our help. It doesn't sound like you have any notion of global poverty or the relative difference in need between Malawi and Malahide.

People in Ireland will lose their jobs, maybe I will, and I'll be a bit worse off. I'll have to live on the dole maybe, but I'll survive.

There is no social welfare in most African countries. 1 in 6 people in the world are hungry right now. Of course, we could get into a long debate about why the world is so unfair, but cleverer people than us have had that debate before. So you can look it up instead of just mouthing off.

Below is the eulogy by Ted Kennedy at Bobby,s funeral,It Really is worth a view,It,s concentration on social justice may be considered hypocrysy coming from the Kennedy,s,Bobby was fircely into justice and many of the words spoken by Ted at Bobs funeral are really relevent to this whole discussion.Sorry I can only give the link,dont know how to upload the video:)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFsMCXXAWI0&feature=related

O'Morris

We should massively cut spending on foreign aid now that we're in a recession and we have to deal with such a big deficit. I don't think we can afford to be spending hundreds of millions of euros of public money every year on people on the other side of the world for whom we are not responsible.

If people want to give to Africa then they're free to do it with their own money.

pow wow

I don't know that many would disagree with a proportionate cut to aid funding if absolutely necessary, but the point is it's being hit disproportionately hard. Aid cuts accounted for 14% of all cuts in January, despite aid representing less than 2% of overall government expenditure.

And before anyone says it, yes I do work for a development NGO. I am really appalled at people suggesting a total suspension of overseas aid - whilst Trotting out the Famine as an example might seem extreme, it's a case in point of what happens when countries who can afford to help (because let's face it, we can), choose to do nothing.

Anyone who thinks the slashing of an aid budget by say 75% means this same 75% will automatically be used to bolster the national economy is naive.

walshb

deadhead13 wrote: »

Ireland is 6th highest donor in the world on a per capita basis - which I think is something to be proud of. There are of issues with corruption and there is a debate about how best to distribute the aid. But whether you like it or not, aid from Ireland will not be stopped. There may however be a further reduction in the upcoming budget.

Proud of?

So, we are in a mess and our own health system is rotting and actually
lower on the efficiency scale than many so called developing countries, and you think we should be proud that we are plunging millions and millions into a black hole, all so we can be seen as some merciful and charitable nation?

Are you also proud that a specialist CF unit had to be scrapped in
Vincent's hospital recently because of a lack of, guess what, FUNDING.

Obscene!

Freaking funding! That's Ireland and if you
are proud of this, the we are rightly screwed

jimmmy

walshb wrote: »

Proud of?

So, we are in a mess and our own health system is rotting and actually
lower on the efficiency scale than many so called developing countries, and you think we should be proud that we are plunging millions and millions into a black hole, all so we can be seen as some merciful and charitable nation?

Are you also proud that a specialist CF unit had to be scrapped in
Vincent's hospital recently because of a lack of, guess what, FUNDING.

Obscene!

Freaking funding! That's Ireland and if you
are proud of this, the we are rightly screwed

Well said and hear hear.

The 25 billion we are borrowing this year alone to fund current spending will have to be repaid with interest.....by our children + grandchildren. Some of the 25,000,000,000.00 we borrow is to give away to the poor neighbours ( distance wise, relatively speaking ) of the people we borrow from ( the oil producing nations ).

Our children + grandchildren will not thank us for helping arm corrupt officials + governments in 3rd world countries, and helping to maintain an aid mentality there.

walshb

meanie boots wrote: »

Anyone who thinks the slashing of an aid budget by say 75% means this same 75% will automatically be used to bolster the national economy is naive.

Well, maybe not the whole 75 percent, but definitely some, and it will
definitely be better off here than in a hole in Africa, funding the war lords and the chancers, both African and Western chancers, the whole damn lot of them!

A saying I am sure all are familiar with, "Quit the rackets and go straight."

jimmmy

+1

and also : "charity should begin at home"

deadhead13

walshb wrote: »

Proud of?

So, we are in a mess and our own health system is rotting and actually
lower on the efficiency scale than many so called developing countries, and you think we should be proud that we are plunging millions and millions into a black hole, all so we can be seen as some merciful and charitable nation?

Are you also proud that a specialist CF unit had to be scrapped in
Vincent's hospital recently because of a lack of, guess what, FUNDING.

Obscene!

Freaking funding! That's Ireland and if you
are proud of this, the we are rightly screwed

The fact the health system is in such a mess is down to lack of management, not funding. The HSE is the real black hole.

walshb

deadhead13 wrote: »

The fact the health system is in such a mess is down to lack of management, not funding. The HSE is the real black hole.

My CF example was specifically due to funding, not "management."

edanto

walshb wrote: »

So, we are in a mess and our own health system is rotting and actually
lower on the efficiency scale than many so called developing countries, and you think we should be proud that we are plunging millions and millions into a black hole, all so we can be seen as some merciful and charitable nation?

No - not so that we can be seen as a merciful and charitable nation, but BECAUSE IT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO.

walshb wrote: »

Are you also proud that a specialist CF unit had to be scrapped in
Vincent's hospital recently because of a lack of, guess what, FUNDING.

Who would be proud of that? Don't be ridiculous. Are you trying to say the people that support overseas aid want Irish people to suffer? Again, I find that offensive.

Can you provide any proof that aid is a black hole? Which type of aid?

Have you ever researched the most significant factors in development issues? What contribution would you think that economics has compared to aid? 50:50? 90:10? 10:90?

Here is one place that you might want to start.
http://www.globalissues.org/issue/2/causes-of-poverty

Finally, don't take this as too much of an insult, but your arguments against international aid aren't very well developed. Perhaps it might save us both some time, and improve the quality of the debate, if you have a read of this http://www.bized.co.uk/virtual/dc/aid/theory/th2.htm

walshb

My arguments aren't well developed?:rolleyes:

In a sentence, I don't agree with it. It's a waste and
is doing more harm than good!

The throwing of bad money after bad money is scandalous

deadhead13

walshb wrote: »

My CF example was specifically due to funding, not "management."

Yes but the funding would have been available if the HSE was run properly.

r0nanf

walshb wrote: »

My arguments aren't well developed?:rolleyes:

I've got to agree with Edanto, your arguement is not well developed, and an emoticon is not a suitable comeback...

walshb

Hey, edanto provided links to back my view. I am not alone!
I agree with those views as to why aid is a negative

walshb

deadhead13 wrote: »

Yes but the funding would have been available if the HSE was run properly.

Oh, funny then when the Africans misappropriate funds, we still
send more?:rolleyes:

We excuse them

Mr.Micro

deadhead13 wrote: »

Yes but the funding would have been available if the HSE was run properly.

I agree. Stopping aid to other countries will not guarantee that the money will be used in the health service or other causes. It would be wasted on some grand scheme. At least for the most part our aid is going for a good cause. We have a recession here not a famine, and our aid will make a difference to others.

edanto

walshb wrote:

Hey, edanto provided links to back my view. I am not alone!
I agree with those views as to why aid is a negative

There is a certain amount of irony in you taking the charity of me providing the links and then being too lazy to do any more research before posting again. You wouldn't want to select even one of those reasons I linked to as the one you think is most important and bring it into the thread so we can debate it?

It's a waste and is doing more harm than good!

Can you support this with any evidence? Things like journal articles, surveys, research reports, even well written magazine articles? Anything with more value than just "It is 'cos I say it is".

For the case that I'm making, that Overseas Aid is effective, good value and worth continuing, here's an Irish Aid report on a programme that ran in Uganda from 2003-5.

http://www.irishaid.gov.ie/Uploads/Evaluation%20Uganda%20Strategy.pdf

ArphaRima

I absolutely cannot support people here who say that no aid should be given.

As I stated before I think aid should be commensurate with the tax take. Proportional aid. It was already the stated aim of charities to have it linked to GDP. That would be a fair measure.

However as a small donor overall, and a generous one per capita, I believe that more controls can be put on our monies. It would stop these arguments that we only keep despots in power and suchlike.
How to do this? Never give money directly to foreign governments. Keep executive control.
We should not donate to government led projects so as to free up the local governments coffers to buy tanks. Keep independent.

Transparency. Auditing. Clear supply lines for goods, services and money from source to target.
Choose our own suppliers. Place terms on the tendering of local contracts. Do not allow choice to be limited by host nation. Stops cronyism.

Streamline the management of such funds through fewer agencies and government departments. Lower the cost of administration at home. Set government conditions on charities receiving aid as to their costs. Keep under review.

Keep an ability to give emergency food and medical relief regardless of above terms.


I think with small changes we can reinvigorate public confidence in charity. They will be more likely to give, give more, and disarm those who parade behind convenient concerns like

when the Africans misappropriate funds, we still send more?