Liberal Democrats commit to international aid spending

In news which will surprise absolutely nobody, the Lib Dems are announcing today that we will maintain the requirement to spend 0.7% of GDP on international aid.

Getting this written into law was one of our best achievements in coalition and we are not going to let it go even though ti has become the focus of the ire of the right wing press.

We believe that it is important that the UK continues to alleviate poverty across the world, helping to build a more secure and stable international community.

Tim Farron explained why this is so important to us:

Liberal Democrats are fierce internationalists, and I am proud of Britain’s record as a world leader in providing help and support to some of the poorest, most vulnerable people in the world.

UK aid prevents suffering.  It allows girls to stay in school, stops babies from dying of preventable illnesses, and ensures that farmers can sell their crops at a fair price. A healthier, safer and more stable world is the best interest of British families as well. That’s why Liberal Democrats are today vowing to fight for Britain’s legacy and protect the 0.7% target.

Our country’s role as a caring and active player on the global stage is under threat from the far-right, with UKIP and the Conservatives attempting to reduce funding and turn Britain’s back to our international commitments. But the British people don’t have to settle for Theresa May’s cold, mean-spirited Britain.

A better future is available. Vote Liberal Democrat. Change Britain’s future.

Read more by or more about , or .
This entry was posted in News.
Advert

6 Comments

  • “Getting this written into law was one of our best achievements in coalition ”

    Certainly delivering on this manifesto commitment was important:
    “fully committed to achieving, by 2013, the Un target of spending 0.7 per cent of national income as aid. We will stick to the rules laid down by the oeCD about what spending counts as aid. We will legislate in the first session of a new Parliament to lock in this level of spending for every year from 2013.”

    Though as that was from the Tory manifesto I’m not totally sure why this is a massive achievement for the Lib Dems in coalition.

  • Duncan Brack 14th May '17 - 5:12pm

    Because, as became increasingly clear during the Coalition, Tory MPs and ministers didn’t believe large parts of the manifesto they’d stood on. It’s a reasonable judgement to say the Tories by themselves would not have achieved this without Liberal Democrats in coalition. It’s also worth noting that they didn’t legislate to enshrine the commitment, as they had promised in their manifesto; this was achieved through a private member’s bill sponsored by Michael Moore, and supported by the government, in the last session of the Parliament.

  • Duncan is right to point to the achievement of Michael Moore. Michael deserves great credit for pressing this matter against the usual closed minds of some Tory MP’s and I was proud to have him as my MP in the Borders..

  • We must remember that when this commitment was made, David Cameron was PM; now we have a less liberal-inclined PM.

  • Jayne Mansfield 15th May '17 - 9:23pm

    Mrs May made a commitment, that if her party was returned to power, it would continue spending 0.7% of GNI on International Development Aid.

    She told an audience last month, that the commitment would be in the Conservative manifesto.

  • 20 years activity to get the Lib Dems into Government so they could ensure the Tories kept their manifesto promises……. Well worth it I feel.

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?

Advert

Recent Comments

  • Nonconformistradical
    " In fact, most rich people employed clever tax avoidance experts to create and find loopholes, and thereby dodge their tax bills." Isn't this justification ...
  • Chloe
    Mick; Debate and discussion lead to a majority of just 23. There's very strong opinions on either side. And parliamentarians should not be giving out emotive ex...
  • David Allen
    Simon McGrath, "@Mick Taylor “in my youth some people could pay up to 98% on their income above a threshold. People talked about leaving, but few ever did....
  • Jana
    Many years ago, prior to wearing seatbelts became law, my mother was in a multiple car crash that she only survived due to not wearing a seatbelt - she was thro...
  • theakes
    Surely the final decider is if the Ban saves lives or ofteenagers being in A & E with cut wrists etc after their impact with social media. Everything else ...