Mike the Psych's Blog

What if psychologists ruled the world? In real life?

British International Aid (Part 2)……read and weep!

Kindadukish's Blog - I am not a number, I am a free man (The Prisoner)


1BC2DF1C00000578-3540886-image-a-65_1460675959967.jpg Robert Mugabe who has single-handedly reduced Zimbabwe to a state of abject poverty and corruption

Britain’s foreign aid budget keeps rising. Currently at £12 billion a year, it is due to soar during David Cameron’s two terms as Prime Minister, to £16 billion by 2020. As the Daily Mail revealed yesterday, Britain pays £1 in every £7 of aid donated by rich countries — three times as much per head as the U.S. — and much of it is being sent to the world’s most corrupt countries where despots line their own pockets and make life even worse for the poor.

Among the most egregious recent examples was South Africa, where — even as our Government gave the country £19 million a year to alleviate poverty — its president Jacob Zuma was spending £13 million of state funds improving his lavish home. Ministers have stopped direct aid to South Africa since…

View original post 1,210 more words


The scandal of British International aid…..

Kindadukish's Blog - I am not a number, I am a free man (The Prisoner)


Britain’s foreign aid budget is now so swollen it accounts for £1 in every £7 given by rich countries. A global study shows the 28 leading industrialised nations handed out £86billion between them last year

The latest figures – from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development – show this target was exceeded last year, hitting 0.71 per cent. That was more than double the 0.3 per cent average of the 28 OECD nations. The UK gave twice as much as France, which has a similar population.

Britain spends three times as much per head as the US, whose population of 332million means it gave £61 per person last year. The UK, with 65million people, gave £188 a head. The Daily Mail has campaigned against the waste of billions of pounds in foreign aid, highlighting a number of scandals, including:

  • The granting of millions of pounds to China, even though…

View original post 1,054 more words

1 Comment

Europe would be pretty honest if it weren’t for the Italians!

italy_peg_figure_1600_wht_14424Transparency International’s latest report shows that Europe would be the most honest continent if it weren’t for widespread corruption in Italy and neighbouring countries.

Italy is less honest than Qatar (no surprise there considering FIFA’s involvement) Ghana or Saudi Arabia.

Britain comes joint 10th with Germany 

Top of the pile? Denmark, Finland and Sweden with the Danes scoring 91 out of a 100.

At the other end of the scale is Somalia and North Korea, joint bottom with just 8 points.

To be like Denmark “you need an independent parliament, free media and law enforcement among other factors” according to Transparency International’s Europe and Central Asia director.

We may be 10th and above the USA (16th), France (23rd), Spain (36th) and Italy (61st) but Britain is seen as a safe haven for money laundering and political financing is less than transparent.

Italy tied with Lesotho after another year of bribery scandals and is seen to be “floundering behind countries generally seen as corrupt such as Romania and Greece”. Italy has plenty of anti-corruption legislation but doesn’t enforce it.

Spain dropped several places after various political scandals and Ireland suffered after the way it treated police officers who tried to expose corrupt colleagues.

Top most honest countries 

  • 1   Denmark
  • 2   Finland
  • 3   Sweden
  • 4   New Zealand
  • =5  Netherlands/Norway
  • 7   Switzerland
  • 8   Singapore
  • 9   Canada
  • 10  UK/Germany

Most corrupt countries

  • 119    Russia
  • 161    Iraq/Libya
  • 166   Afghanistan
  • =167  North Korea/Somalia

It’s a pity the EU isn’t included as it now admits that half of the money they disburse is siphoned off illegally and they haven’t had their accounts approved for years.

See also African despots and corruption

For further information go to http://www.transparency.org/

Corruption…………or merely different cultural norms?

Kindadukish's Blog - I am not a number, I am a free man (The Prisoner)

screenshot 2014-12-03 06.24.57.png

Transparency International has published its 2014 Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI), which ranked 175 countries and territories based on how corrupt their administrative and political institutions are perceived to be on a scale from 0 (highly corrupt) to 100 (very clean).

Compiled from a combination of surveys and assessments of “the abuse of entrusted power for private gain,” the CPI is the most widely used indicator of corruption worldwide.

Here are the 17 most corrupt countries, according to the index:

screenshot 2014-12-03 06.29.01.png

The lowest ranked countries are perceived as “plagued by poor governance, and untrustworthy and badly functioning public institutions like police or media.”

The four least corrupt countries are Denmark (92), New Zealand (91), Finland (89), and Sweden (87), while the US came in 17th — along with Barbados, Hong Kong, and Ireland — with a rating of 74.

Top performers are found to have “high levels of press freedom, open budget…

View original post 107 more words

Corruption getting worse, says poll

Kindadukish's Blog - I am not a number, I am a free man (The Prisoner)

One person in four has paid a bribe to a public body in the last year, according to a survey carried out in 95 countries by Transparency International.

The poor record of some African nations on bribery stands out. Sierra Leone has the highest number of respondents admitting to having paid a bribe – 84% – and seven out of nine of the countries with the highest reported bribery rate are in sub-Saharan Africa. See the list below. The countries with the lowest reported bribery rate are Denmark, Finland, Japan and Australia, they all have a bribery rate of 1%.

Population who have paid a bribe

27% world average
Top countries:
1. Sierra Leone 84%
2. Liberia 75%
3. Yemen 74%
4. Kenya 70%
People, %Number of countries
  • Less than 5%   16
  • 5 – 9%                7
  • 10 – 14%           10
  • 15 – 19%…

View original post 578 more words

Aid to African despots – why?

G550Charities often say they get more contributions from working class ie poorer sections of the community than the middle or upper classes. (OK, there are exceptions like Microsoft founder and philanthropist Bill Gates.)

And now that seems to apply to the UK as well. We’re in the s**t economically yet we strive to take the lead on overseas development. No wonder it’s causing a stink when we can’t afford to fund hospitals, schools or care for the elderly in our own country.

And some countries eg India, don’t even want our help let alone need it. India, like other BRIC countries (Brazil, Russia and China), is booming and can afford to have a large army, run a space programme, and be a nuclear power. That it doesn’t spend its money on improving basic living conditions for the 25% of its population living below the poverty line merely reflects badly on a country that claims to be the world’s largest democracy.

A lot of people refuse to give money to charities in Africa because they wonder how much aid actually gets through with all the corruption and inefficiency (and Bob Geldof can shove his “ignore the corruption thing”. Why should we? I don’t begrudge him the plaudits he got for Band Aid but since then he’s enjoyed the high life on the back of it – well it wasn’t his crap music was it – and no-one likes to feel they’ve been ripped off).

Stories of NGO staff riding around in expensive 4 wheel-drive vehicles, dictators buying top of the range bullet proof Mercs eg Zimbabwe (68% of population living below poverty line), Malawi which bought 39 S-class Mercedes (53%), and Swaziland which bought a fleet of BMWs for the King’s wives plus a £1/4M Maybach 62 for him (69%), don’t help.

And the latest news is that we gave Uganda £70M in aid and the President went out and spent £30M on a top of the range private jet – a Gulfstream G550. So is it any wonder that I don’t want to contribute to paying for some despot’s Mercedes or gold-plated Kalshnikovs.

Providing vaccination, largely courtesy of Bill Gates, is definitely better than giving money. Providing countries with the technology and skills to feed themselves would be even better and birth control to reduce the number of hungry mouths needing to be fed would help enormously.  

Jonathan Clayton’s commentary in The Times today (05/07/11) is spot on. He writes about Kenya being listed as one of the countries supposedly facing the worst food crisis of the century.

This he reminds us is the destination of choice for the rich and the royal with its capital Nairobi booming and full of 5 star restaurants.

And a country which makes millions exporting fresh flowers, which need a lot of water, and vegetables to the UK.

In short a country that can afford to feed its poor but doesn’t want to.  And why would you if the UN – paid for by western taxpayers –  and other aid workers and charities do it for you?

In this case it isn’t necessarily dictators and despots but lack of political will and pure commercial considerations, albeit influenced by tribal loyalties.

Updated 4 November 2011: November’s Management Today magazine lists the worst countries for corruption.

Here they are in order of their Trust Index Scores

  1. Somalia
  2. Afghanistan & Myanmar
  3. Iraq
  4. Sudan, Turkmenistan & Uzbekistan
  5. Chad
  6. Burundi
  7. Angola & Equatorial Guinea
  8. DR of Congo, Guinea, Kyrgystan, & Venezuela
  9. Cambodia, Central African Republic, Comoros, Congo-Brazaville, Guinea-Bissau, Kenya, Laos, Papua New Guinea, Russia, Tajikistan
Source: Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index 2010: