World corruption

Discussion in 'Current Affairs' started by Wightsparker, May 11, 2016.

Welcome to the Navy Net aka Rum Ration

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial RN website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Interesting to see the coverage of the PM's comments on corruption in Nigeria and Afghanistan - and the response from the Nigerian president that the UK should return to Nigeria the monies which have been apparently been invested in the UK by corrupt Nigerians.

    It will also be interesting to see the UK Government's response to the latter. I suspect that there will be a tightening of financial regulations.

    What's the betting that we will then see even more hassle for ordinary people trying to deal with banks, building societies, legal issues, power of attorney, the taxman, etc as a result of the usual jobsworth way of interpreting financial legislation?
    • Like Like x 2
  2. he was only telling the truth
    However he would also have been telling the truth had he added "But not so corrupt as the EU mmaam"
  3. Ageing_Gracefully

    Ageing_Gracefully War Hero Moderator Book Reviewer

    The Nigerian President has said he is going to ask for the return of all of Nigeria's assets which he says Britain is holding.

    I agree on the basis that a country's main asset is its people then every person with Nigerian DNA can be sent back to help that country in the way that the President wants.

    That would work.
    • Like Like x 8
    • Funny Funny x 3
  4. (granny)

    (granny) Book Reviewer

    The Prime Ministers comments in front of HM brought to mind something about 'stones and glasshouses' !
  5. Wonder if the Nigerian President is referring to all the dosh that his countrymen keep asking me to hold in my bank for them???
    • Funny Funny x 1
  6. I wonder when camoron is going to sort out the corruption in Westminster?
  7. (granny)

    (granny) Book Reviewer

    Never is the short answer. He has already made his escape plans. 2020 he leaves office. No matter what the UK decides, regarding the EU, he will ensure that 'It wasn't my fault Guv! '
  8. I would not trust a politician further than I could spit, they are all liars motivated by self interest.
  9. Seadog

    Seadog War Hero Moderator

    You know them all? Wow!
  10. Of course not, I've just tarred them all with the same brush, just as I would Roma gypsies.
    • Like Like x 2
  11. The world has always been corrupt, it just depends how good the corrupted are in covering their tracks.
    In the 80's there was an intergovernmental meeting called "The North/South Dialogue", which included large companies (such as IBM, where my wife worked) and the heads, or representatives, of most Western Democracies.
    Their topic? How to prevent overseas aid being misused by third world countries, and their leaders.
    Several solutions were mooted, I can't remember them exactly, but amongst them were:
    1. Try to dictate where the monies could be spent. (Discarded because it looked like interfering in other sovereign states business).
    2. Ring-fence the monies and give it directly to the organisations we wanted it to go to (education, health, etc.) (Discarded because it looked like interfering in other sovereign states business).
    3. Form a United Nations World army and use it to force dictatorships, and the like, into doing the right thing. (Discarded because it looked like good old-fashioned imperialism)(Plus a UN army could fall into the hands of peoples with less than altruistic intentions!)
    Anyway, it turned out that they eventually decided that things should continue as it always had, and they would rely upon the trickle-down effect for it to reach where it was intended (that is, around 5% to 10% of all aid money!!!)
    So, today it continues, but a couple of countries only, have tried the system whereby they will not give money to emerging countries, but they will provide the money, and manpower, to build schools and hospitals whilst teaching the locals the skills they need to continue doing it themselves. China is one, who have entered Africa and built railways etc. (and spreading their influence therein) and New Zealand is another. Why don't we in the West do the same?
    • Like Like x 2
    • Informative Informative x 1
  12. Cast your mind back and between 100 and 150 years ago that is exactly what we used to do. It wasn't aid as such but a means of exploiting the natural resources of the benefiting fledgling country. The end result was the same though as many of Britain's former territories boast some of the best infrastructure in the world. Indian Railways spring readily to mind but I'm sure there are others.
    As the British Empire was reduced(quite rightly) and the countries interests were handed over for their own people to look after in many cases all the good work was undone while different factions battled for control.
    China is no shining example of altruism as their motives are much the same as ourselves a hundred years ago but they seem to get away with it not been seen as a former imperialist nation.
    My answer? I haven't got one but I'm very much tempted to go for withholding any funding where the money goes direct to the country's coffers in one big lump rather than trickle it down and pay for things as we see them being built or developed.
  13. Unfortunately the large infrastructure projects are all well and good, but overseas aid is as much to do with the alleviation of abject poverty as anything else, but very little aid ever gets through to those most in need.
  14. I have to agree with you ... however the same can be said for "aid agencies" such as "Oxfam" (name pulled out of a hat ... there are other aid agencies) ... I think the amount of every £1 donated reaching the intended target i.e. the poor souls who actually need the food/water etc after the overheads have been paid out is some thing like 10p in the £1 ... OK in this case its the "organisation" that is creaming off its running costs etc whereas what you are alluding to is the UK donating large amounts of taxpayers dosh direct to the Govt of the country to help with providing food/water/infrastructure etc and that Govt creaming off big bucks to line its pockets and keep themselves in luxury where their countrymen anguish in poverty so in effect it matters not one jot if its us personally donating dosh to a "charity" or "UK Inc" donating taxpayers dosh as foreign aid ... someone somewhere creams off a large proportion ... and you don't see many CEO's of charities driving round in a beat up Robin Reliant!

    Now OK there is perhaps some mileage in saying that if a Foreign Govt is seen to be using UK foreign aid to keep themselves in luxury or perhaps fund civil war then the UK is within its rights to say no more however the dilemma is then .. if some of the dosh donated as foreign aid does get through to the starving masses albeit a small amount in the scheme of things ... then if our foreign aid is withdrawn they end up getting diddly squat which begs the question ... are we morally wrong in providing the dosh in the first place and keeping the local Govt in tea and stickies or if we withhold it so the country as a whole get sweet stuff all???

    At the end of the day ... are we putting western ideals on countries who if left to their own devices would otherwise be living as they have always done e.g. hand to mouth farming etc? Whereas we (as in Western society) have an expectation that everyone will have two cars, running water and sanitation and go on hols twice a year and look down on third world countries who have to walk 10 miles just to get water from a well that is infested with goat sh*t etc as needing to have what we have ... so we give them dosh to provide it - or alternatively is it because we expect to have out of season foods in our shops throughout the year / oil ... cheap consumer goods and the only way we are going to get it is by exploiting the under developed countries into providing it for us ... and in that scenario ... who's the morally corrupt ones ... us or the country who's leaders are creaming off from the foreign aid???
    • Like Like x 1
  15. If all you're doing is feeding the starving masses then you're not really helping . It is like fighting a fire in the living room while someone is in the kitchen spraying petrol on the fire. Without proper infrastructure i.e transport, roads, schools and healthy sanitation we'll never stop shit holes from being other than shit holes. We can help by showing the people how to not only feed themselves but have enough surplus to sell to others. If some of that surplus finds it's way to ourselves and the money earned goes back to the producers so much the better.
    We can alleviate famines but never stop them unless the countries have the tools in place to help themselves. If most of our "help" is being misdirected away from it's intended target then this will fail and we're back to square one with film of scrawny fly bitten babies in the arms of their emaciated mother.
  16. After WW2 the Marshall plan tried to do as you've suggested, and supplied tractors to East Africa, etc. the roadsides soon filled up with tractors with empty fuel tanks!! What we are talking about is a complete sea-change for the African continent, which, if the will was there in the Western world, would be achievable.
  18. A high birthrate is a symptom of poverty, just look at family sizes in the UK, after WW2, where money was scarce, and jobs even scarcer. In Gosport alone, 6 kid families were common, with 10 kid families not unheard of. Provide education to a country and the population will start to prosper. Increase the prosperity of a country, and the birthrate will drop. It is all a slow painstaking process, because the trouble with giving tractors to relatively uneducated African farmers, in the forties, had nothing to do with the shortage of fuel, and everything to do with the complete ignorance of motorised transport. In the UK, post war, coal and other necessities were still being delivered by horse and cart, so just imagine how backward it must have been in places like Kenya? I must admit that the old adage of giving a man food and he will eat for a week, give him a plough and a fishing rod and he will eat for a lifetime, is corny, but serves to indicate the problem facing aid agencies and overseas government aid dispensers.
    Good intentions rely upon the crooks in virtually any system not being there, but they are, unfortunately.

Share This Page