Skip to main content

When is $25bn not $25bn

I have found where the $25bn figure comes from. It is quoted somewhere by the OECD. Notwithstanding Bob Geldof's claim* that it is related to the Live8 concerts, actually it is a figure that has been cited for some time.

ODA (Official Development Aid) is the net bilateral payment including money paid to international organisations. It is net of money loaned and money repaid. In otherwords if a country is loaned aid then that is added to the gross. If a country repays a loan then it reduces aid for that year.

That does mean that the figure is ultimately adjustable through countries lending some money to an international institution that is then repaid in a later year.

The link is to the Development Aid Committee of the OECD which is the main source of this information.

As far as I can tell the G8 jolly has not delivered anything that was not planned earlier in the year. I would like to pin down exactly where the OECD has calculated the $25bn (out of $50bn) figure.

Perhaps one of my main criticisms of the Blair spin is that there are so many uncertainties and exaggerations that we lose track of basic practical issues and hence fail to deliver.

claim* in case the link changes:
"It's been a long walk from Live Aid's $200 million 20 years ago to Live 8's $25 billion today."

Live8 was an excellent idea, but the main result has been the excellent result of reuniting Pink Floyd for what as a very good set.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Statement re false allegations from Esther Baker

Statement by John Hemming
I am pleased that the Police have now made it clear that there has been a concerted effort to promote false criminal allegations against me and that the allegations had no substance whatsoever.
I would like to thank Emily Cox, my children, Ayaz Iqbal (my Solicitor), my local lib dem team and many others who supported me through this dreadful experience. There are many worse things that happen to people, but this was a really bad experience.
It is bad enough to have false allegations made about yourself to the police, but to have a concerted campaign involving your political opponents and many others in public creates an environment in which it is reasonable to be concerned about ill founded vigilante attacks on your family and yourself. Luckily there was a more substantial lobby to the contrary as well, which included many people who were themselves real survivors of abuse, which has helped.
I am normally someone who helps other people fight injustice. …

Homelessness vs Selling Books

Candidates in elections tend to find themselves very busy with lots of things to do.  It is, therefore, necessary to prioritise things to ensure that the important things are dealt with.

To me the issue of homelessness and rough sleeping is an important issue.  Therefore, when Birmingham's Faith Leaders group contacted me to ask me what I would propose and whether I would work with them to make things better I was pleased to respond with my views and indicate that I would work with them after the election.

The Faith Leaders Group (Bishops and other religious leaders in Birmingham) have now sent out their report.

Sadly, according to their report,  I was the only candidate for Yardley to respond.  The group in their report said:

"Particularly disappointing was the lack of response from some of those candidates seeking re-election as MP for their respective constituencies."
It is worth looking at the priorities of my opponent.
Interestingly today she has decided to be at th…

Millionaires and politics

The Labour Party spent most of the last election criticising me for being a successful businessman (aka millionaire). That is business in the private sector employing over 250 people. It is worth looking at the situation for the Labour Candidate now:

For the year 2016-7 Annual Income from Parliament74,962Specifically for her book51,250Other media income etc5,322.82Total declared income131,534.82

Traditionally anyone with an annual income of over £100,000 has been considered to be a millionaire. I did not use my position in parliament to increase my income.


I have been asked for sources for this. This BBC piece looks at how one should define rich. It was written in 2011 so the figures will be slightly out of date. There are perhaps 2 relevant pieces:
"In 1880 a rich person would have had £100,000 in assets or an income of £10,000 a year, he says. About a hundred people a year died leaving £100,000 and by 1910 this was 250 - "a microscopic fraction of the number of death…