David Cameron was today forced to defend sending £12 billion abroad in foreign aid when confronted by a woman who may die because the NHS will not fund the cancer treatment she desperately needs.

The Prime Minister was taken to task during a live radio interview this morning where he denied Britain was wrong to have increased funding to other states by 37 per cent despite huge cuts to home budgets.

A non-Hodgkin lymphoma sufferer, who used the name Anna because some of her family do not know she is ill, asked him why taxpayers’ money was going to other countries – such as India, even though it can afford its own space programme – and not to people like her.

India also has almost three times as many billionaires as the UK.

The 68-year-old from north London has stopped cancer treatment because of a dangerous allergic reaction, and the drug she needs is available in Germany but not in her area.

Tragically she is also a full-time carer for her husband, but is so ill he has been forced to go into a care home and she is living alone at home on only £68 per week.

The Prime Minister told LBC listeners he would look at her case but the UK has a ‘moral obligation to help people in other countries even when times are tough,’ he said.

‘Breaking promises to the poorest people in the world would not be the right thing to do,’ he added, saying without the aid more foreigners would seek asylum in Britain.

Speaking to MailOnline Anna said Mr Cameron should be making sure people in Britain are well looked after first.

‘I understand what he is saying, but I would say to him if your family is starving you wouldn’t go and feed your neighbours. He should be looking after people here.

‘I have offered to pay my own airfare to Germany to get this treatment, but every day I wake up waiting for news of whether a charity can raise the £250,000 I need to pay for it. I know I may be one of many people in this situation and I don’t think that is right.

‘We put all this money into Europe but we are unable to go there and get something for it.

‘My husband has gone into a care home because I cannot care for him myself. I am just consumed with grief.

‘All I want is to get my husband back,’ she said tearfully, ‘My life has stopped completely and I haven’t even told my whole family that I am ill. My grandchildren are frightened of my wig and I just want them back here too.’

The Prime Minister said that the Coalition had increased spending on the NHS.

‘It is very important that people get treatment,’ he told LBC, ‘We have not cut spending to the NHS we have increased it.

‘We have the cancer drugs fund and we are looking to extend that.

‘We are having a tough time at the moment but we must keep promises to the poorest countries in the world.’

Mr Cameron is under huge pressure to freeze or even cut Britain’s foreign aid spending.

India is still receiving nearly £300million from British taxpayers in aid, for example, despite the country being rich enough to launch its own space programme.

Their own ministers even described the sum they received as ‘peanuts’.

A powerful committee of peers attacked the Prime Minister’s pledge to increase aid spending by 37 per cent to more than £12billion a year in order to meet an ‘arbitrary’ United Nations target.

They said they fully supported humanitarian aid for disaster zones. But they pointed out that it accounts for less than 10 per cent of the vast budget of the Department for International Development (DfID).

In a devastating verdict they warned that the rush to increase spending ‘risks reducing the quality, value for money and accountability’ of the aid programme.

The finding is a major embarrassment for Mr Cameron who is said, while in opposition, to have adopted the target of spending 0.7 per cent of Britain’s income on aid, partly to help ‘detoxify’ the Conservatives’ image as ‘the Nasty Party’.

The cross-party economic affairs committee said ministers seemed more interested in the amount of money they were spending on aid than the results they were achieving.

The committee’s chairman, former Tory Cabinet minister Lord MacGregor, said: ‘We were unanimous in our view that legislation for a 0.7 per cent target is inappropriate, and that the Government should reconsider.

‘We believe aid should be judged by the criteria of effectiveness and value for money, not by whether a specific arbitrary target is reached.’

Topics: ,

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • NorthernWind

    All foreign aid should be cancelled. How can any Western government justify blowing tax payer funds on foreign failed states when they themselves are running large deficits.

    It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

    On another note, the state should get its hand out of healthcare. It is obviously not capable of running it properly.

    • Up to my neck in CA

      It reminds me of the large corporations who are losing millions a year, but still pay their CEO a HUGE bonus. Will the madness ever end?

      • The Verdict of History

        It gets worse.

        We funnel BILLIONS to unworthy, unappreciative incompetents who hate us with the utmost passion (Pakistan), and we eagerly dispatch precious resources to genetically deficient racial degenerates in third world countries (Africa).

        Foreign aid is only justified if it is being sent to European nations that wish to engineer MASS DEPORTATION programs for non-western peoples.

        No THAT would be a spectacularly sound investment…

  • The mental illness of multiculturalism. Putting others ahead of your own. While in return the others will always put themselves ahead of you and yours.

  • David Ashton

    From the first moment this glib PR man made his bid for the leadership of the “Conservative” Party it was clear that if he had any “convictions” at all they were left Liberal Democrat in the UK sense; and all his actions in “coalition” from redefining marriage to foreign “aid” have confirmed this, his accommodations in a “Tory” direction only temporary responses to backbench and constituency concern.  Every prediction about him published by Derek Turner’s “Right Now!” has proved accurate in detail.  Cameron did utter a (usefully quotable) criticism of “multiculturalism” alongside Merkel in February 2011, but his actions in “government” belie his words. 

  • guest

    Foreign aid has now become a nice term for giving other countries a free ride with taxpayers money.  The same can also be said for how illegal immigrants and foreigners come to our countries for “a better life”.  We’re always the ones who end up putting our own lives and welfare aside just so they can have the “better life” that they came here for.  And now their “better life” becomes a free ride for them.  Their dreams become our nightmares.

  • loyalwhitebriton

    The reality is, should Camoron could step down from his Ivory tower for just one moment, if the government scrapped International aid they would cease being the “nasty party” and become the “nice party”, at least in the eyes of the British public.
    Most of our aid ends up in the pockets of African dictators, the rest goes to a rich country like India which has it’s own space and nuclear programmes, and has more millionaires and billionaires than we do!
    Camoron is a Knave of the highest order!

  • ncpride

    I wish she could have gotten another jab in and ask him why his administration is allowing the daughters of Britain to be used and abused by foreign invaders with little to no consequence.

  • anarchyst

    So much for “socialized medicine” . . . coming to a state near you . . . what will Canadians do then??

  • anarchyst

    The dirty little secret about “Canadian socialized medicine” is there is a “safety valve”  which utilizes AMERICAN doctors and hospitals to take care of life-threatening conditions that may afflict Canadian citizens.  American border city hospitals have agreements with Canadian provincial health-care systems to take Canadian patients.  Of course, it pays to live near the Canadian-USA border.
    Just recently a Canadian “premier” politician came to the USA for treatment for a heart condition.  That sort of tells you what is in store for us.
    What will Canadians do when our health-care system mirrors theirs?  Where will they go??
    A number of years ago, Canadian hospitals were “caught” using their CAT scanners for veterinary “patients” (animals).
    Here you had patients on “waiting lists” to use these scanners while animals were being brought to the “front of the line”.  You see, the animal’s owners were “cash” customers while the human patients were regarded as just “numbers” on a list (and were made to wait).

  • scott81

    I can guarantee none of these countries will be returning the aid favor in the future when white societies implode under mass immigration and go bankrupt. I consider what Cameron is doing as an act of treason, but there is no judicial system in place  that would hold him accountable.  Unfortunately this madness will not end in our countries until massive social unrest occurs, our countries are so infected by liberalism that have to be broken and rebuilt again from the ground up.