Luddite - how are 'our' poor and less fortunate suffering because we try to help people who live in extreme poverty which is completely incomparable with any poverty we have here?

If we stopped giving foreign aid and gave it to poor people in this country the right would go nuts.

Sam we didn't help anyone. Aids become the African poison. It breeds corruption and stifles development. Only the Africans can solve Africa's problems not missed placed European guilt. It's well functioning capitalism Africa needs the most not pity.

Sorry Sam, the word is Aid not Aids but the two go together both are poisonous both plague Africa. Sam it's a great virtue to care for others, but from time to time others must care for themselves. All the charity in the world can't replace that.

Jonathan Glennie points out, “In reality, in many African countries aid has meant more poverty, more hungry people, worse basic services for poor people and damage to already precarious democratic institutions.” (The trouble with aid: why less could mean more for Africa, by Jonathan Glennie, Zed Books, 2008.)

The aid conditions of privatisation and liberalisation have had more impact than aid money. As he observes, “donor conditions have harmed Africa overall.” He notes, “trade liberalisation policies as a whole have cost Africa $272 billion since 1985.” A 2004 report found that “adjustment policies have contributed to the further impoverishment and marginalisation of local populations, while increasing economic inequality.”
Glennie notes, “The European Union is currently using the promise of better trade access through Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) to pressurize African governments to adopt policies most do not want to adopt. Just like aid conditionalities, this pressure undermines democratic accountability and the ability of African countries to make decisions in their own interests.”
He notes “the central paradox of aid – that the act of aid giving in itself undermines both state capacity and accountability.”
He sums up, “aid itself has undermined democracy, institutions and the capacity to govern in Africa.”
Glennie observes that aid is good for the donor governments. “There are two main reasons for the donor focus on aid. First, aid is the easiest and least costly way for politicians to be seen to be responding to the continuing and unacceptable poverty that exists in most of the world, particularly in Africa. And second, far from being costly, aid is a cost-efficient way of buying economic advantage and political support.” For example, spending on technical aid, mostly the salaries of foreign advisers shipped in from donor countries, accounts for half of all aid.
He concludes, “Aid increases may harm efforts to reduce poverty and improve governance and sustainable development in most African countries.” Nations need to control capital flows, create and use their own resources, and not rely on foreign aid.

It is time the media actually explain to the xenophobic public that Cameron and his chums are not in the charity business when they advocate the continuation of Foreign aid.So they can relax, no real aid is reaching the poor of this world.That should cheer them up.
Why oh why a right wing government hell bent of doing the bidding of capitalism, would be so keen in helping poor people around the world??
The answer is very simple.As hinted in this article, simply because it benefits big business.
Every bit of hand out is tied up with commercial contracts and further stripping of that country's resources. Foreign aid is not FREE!
Even apparently charitable projects such as Bill Gates' vaccination plans
have a little stink about them. Who is to supply all these vaccines if not a massive pharmaceutical company?
Very lucrative for them thank you very much.
Yes I am very cynical about the whole thing because I know governments only act in their self interest or more accurately in the interests of big business.
So somebody should explain all that to the morons who read the "Daily Mail" that there is no point getting worked up about this, since as we give them something with one hand we handsomely help ourselves with the other.Meanwhile the poor of the world stay poor, but global business is happy, happy to exploit those countries through their fortunately corrupt governments. This situation feeds on and perpetrates corruption and maintain the Statu quo.
Meanwhile we strangle their economies by demanding the most horrendous interest rates for the loans we forced them to take in the first place.
Then we can blame the poor people of the world for their inability to get out of poverty giving us a good excuse for not giving to overseas charities.
A very depressing sate of affairs.

"Then there are basic things like clean water, stopping disease and things like that which is worth doing merely out of kindness."

Why do we need to help people get clean water in a country with a space programme? It is entirely possible that our aid money just frees up local government spending for other purposes.

Fact0r***

Are there still ANY left wing person reading on this web site? or has it been taken over by right wing people still enamoured with the capitalist system?

Agree with some of this article, but very worried about the ridiculous statement that without other changes vaccinations are "utterly useless". It's both anti-science and anti-justice. The lack of access of people to life saving vaccinations is linked to the power of multinational pharmaceutical companies, their research budgets and intellectual property rights. Tackling this power, and therefore lack of access to vaccines, should be one of the structural causes of poverty being challenged.