David Cameron: Aid Spending Makes Me Proud to Be British

Telegraph (London), June 8, 2013

David Cameron has defended the amount of money that the government spends on foreign aid and said it made him “proud to be British”.

The Prime Minister said that the world should be aiming to save 20 million children from chronic malnutrition by 2020 as he hosted a conference intended to drum up billions of pounds to tackle world hunger.

Graca Machel, the wife of former South African president Nelson Mandela had been due to appear at the conference but flew home to see her husband as he was taken to hospital with a lung infection.

She had been due to address the Nutrition for Growth meeting on Saturday afternoon.

Addressing the conference, Mr Cameron said that Britain was leading the way on aid even through the amount the country spent on aid was equivalent to just 1p from every £1 of tax paid.

The government has faced heavy criticism in recent months after it emerged that British aid was going to relatively wealthy countries.

A sixth of the Department for International Developments budget is also diverted to the EU for its own schemes, which have included £800,000 being spent on building a water park in Morocco while Iceland received £20 million.

Around £5 million was spent in Bangladesh setting up a Question Time style television programme.

Mr Cameron acknowledged concerns that taxpayers money was being spent on aid while the government faces further austerity cuts at home.

“We are the kind of people who believe in doing what is right,” Mr Cameron told the conference in London,” he told the event in London.

“We accept the moral case for keeping our promises to the world’s poorest even when we face challenges at home.

“When people are dying, we don’t believe in finding excuses. We believe in trying to do something about it.”

Mr Cameron highlighted Band Aid, Live8, and Red Nose Day, and the public’s generous response to appeals to disasters abroad.

“It says something about this country. It says something about our standing in the world and our sense of duty in helping others.

“In short – it says something about the kind of people we are.

“And that makes me proud to be British.”

The Prime Minister said it was important to continue providing aid to developing countries even while people back at home were having to tighten the purse strings.

Britain was “out in front” in reaching the target to give 0.7% of GDP because of the “kind of people we are”, he insisted.

He said: “We understand that if we invest in countries before they get broken we might not end up spending so much on dealing with the problems whether that’s immigration or new threats to our national security.

“So yes, Britain will continue to lead from the front. We are one of the few countries in the world to meet our promise to spend 0.7 per cent of our Gross National Income on development.

“And as part of this commitment, we will use that money to play a full part in the battle to beat hunger.

“If others play their part too, the commitments that the UK is making today could help 37 million children fight malnutrition by getting the right food and the right care.

“If these children grow up healthy, they will increase their earnings by 10%.

“And at what cost per taxpayer? Not even as much as 1p a day. And more broadly, if you take our whole commitment to 0.7% then for every £1 you pay in tax, just over 1 pence goes toward our aid budget.

“That’s a good investment.”

Mr Cameron admitted many people feared the problem of hunger was “never going to be solved” and more needed to be done.

“The truth is if we carry on doing things in the same way, they will be right,” he warned.

“But because we have the track record and because we have kept our promises we have earned the right to say that we should do things differently.

“We will never beat hunger just by spending more money or getting developed nations and philanthropists to somehow ‘do development’ to the developing world.

“It has to be about doing things differently. Different in terms of business. Different in terms of science. Different in terms of government.

“It’s all about helping those in developing countries take control of their own destiny.”

The Prime Minister was addressing fellow leaders, businessmen, and foundations as they try to hammer out ambitious targets.

Campaigning groups hope that an extra $3 billion of funding for direct nutritional interventions between now and 2020 can be agreed.

Bill Gates and Danny Boyle are set to address a protest rally to coincide with the London meeting, which comes ahead of the G8 summit in Northern Ireland.

The demonstration, hosted by lobby group Enough Food For Everyone If, is expected to attract thousands to Hyde Park.

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.
  • David Ashton

    The only “work” Cameron has ever done outside “politics” was as a TV PR man. That tells you more about him than anything else.

  • libertarian1234

    “David Cameron: Aid Spending Makes Me Proud to Be British”

    He’s really saying aid-spending makes him feel proud to be gullible and stupid.

  • Cameron- wear a British military uniform in London and walk around town. Also walk through some muslum areas.

  • Stentorian_Commentator

    How about Boer aid? Now that the English played a big role in setting the Boers up for extermination, could they at least help them get out of South Africa? If they just removed muslims from the Netherlands, they might be able to fit them all.

  • The__Bobster

    David Cameron has defended the amount of money that the government spends on foreign aid and said it made him “proud to be British”.

    Soon he won’t have to spend a pence on foreign aid. All the foreigners will be in the UK.

  • This aristocratic sell out is a direct descendant of King William IV.

    Cameron’s direct lineage is from an illegitimate child of King William, so Cameron is not in direct line to the throne. Fortunately for England, William was succeeded by one of their better monarchs, Victoria. William’s brother had already died, so William’s niece inherited the throne.

    So, this tool is related to Her Royal Highness herself, and we see why he has several backers hiding in the shadows., and how he can become Prime Minister at 43.
    Thanks to all of the inbreeding, there is a resemblance, is there?

  • Spartacus

    “When people are dying, we don’t believe in finding excuses. We believe in trying to do something about it.”

    He didn’t seem so flared up about Lee Rigby… Oh wait, he was white, so naturally, the jew David Cameron doesn’t give a s**t about him…

  • RisingReich

    Simple concept here – stop feeding the critters and you will see less and less of them.

  • Romulus

    Im shocked and appalled!!! I simply cannot find the “clean and witty quips” necessary to comment. Truly at a loss for words.

  • Romulus

    As are most of the wests industrial economies.

  • KenelmDigby

    This coincides with a time that ‘food banks’ have massively proliferated across Britain.

  • There is so much ‘waste’, corruption and pocket-lining with aid money and charity groups that it beggars the mind. No wonder he wants it to continue, I am sure he has chums who make vast sums from it.

    Cynicism aside, I wonder if he is “proud” to have contributed to the doubling of the demographic of the poor and needy in many countries since Live Aid in 1985.

    I think I once read that money spent on Africa alone since 1985 spirals into the many £Billions, and it was not even equivalent of the costs of all the warfare that has gone on there between Africans.

    Given that demographers estimate that over 90% of world population growth is to be expected from the ‘third world’ and ‘develping nations’ – is it really a good idea to sustain this, particularly when the geese that lay the golden eggs (us) are seeing our demographic swathed in half?

    It is a nasty business to be sure. Quite horrible in fact. But sometimes you may have to be cruel to be kind. Continuing the way we are doing is surely madness.

    • Lop_Eared_Galoot


      Given that demographers estimate that over 90% of world population growth is to be expected from the ‘third world’ and ‘develping nations’ – is it really a good idea to sustain this, particularly when the geese that lay the golden eggs (us) are seeing our demographic swathed in half?

      The reason that 90% of the population growth comes from the third world is that (as of 2010) whites make up only 16% of the total planetary population and have TFRs or Total Fertility Ratios per woman of 1.83 in the U.S. and 1.6 in Europe. i.e. Women’s Liberation has cost us the ability to sustain our population.

      Add to this the ‘mass effect’ that Western Aid nutrition has had on the metabolism as reproductive proliferance of third world populations where (in Africa) a woman may have 6 kids before she’s 25 and her first before she is 14 and you see the reality of mediocrity monster surviving to bury us ONLY because we feed it while ignoring our own reproductive responsibilities.

      Perhaps no greater example of this exists than Ethiopia where the preponderance of images of skeletal children in the 1980s let to such a population explosion (thanks to International Aid) that the 27 million of the time is now 80 million today and will become some 270 million by 2050, more than the population of the largest European nations combined.

      Indeed, Africa, a land 1/3rd desert, 1/4 jungle and 1/2 Savannah (which is to say an environment that spends 9 months baking to desert from the 3 months it exists under monsoonal deluge) just crossed the billion person mark five years ago and yet, by 2050, will be at 2.6 billion. They are the ONLY continental population who is estimated to have continued growth through the end of the 21st century and they are also the dumbest, with an average IQ of about 70 (60 is considered certifiably retarded in the U.S.), they have no way of understanding the consequences of dependence on outside help when the outsiders themselves ‘go away’ due to critically falling population levels and replacement by Hispanic and Asian groups who _do not care a wit_ about black survival. Anywhere.

      What we absolutely MUST understand is that the worlds resident racial populations still operate under a grossly primitive, instinctive, understanding of how life works: If you have plenty, you breed more until you reach carrying capacity for the environment and then you die back. While this is instinctive and a good way to maintain genetic diversity as an evolutionary capacity to create useful mutations in predator/pathogen/climate controlled populations; where outside agencies create artificial surpluses beyond what the natural carrying capacities are, there is no cognitive understanding of limits to reproductive largesse. This includes nominally ‘smart’ populations like the Asians as well as inbetweeners like the Hispanic/Indian cultures of Central and South America.

      ONLY whites, who labored for millennia on the verge of extinction in an arctic tundra that was the Eurasian plateau have any real comprehension of value in the K-strategy of investment in small numbers of children as big expectations of next-gen innovative production. We MAKE heroes because our ancestors could not AFFORD quantitative alternatives. There simply wasn’t a calorie base to support.

      Ironically, given the wonderland we inherited when the ice finally retreated in a post-glacial condition, we now look on non-whites with a combination of pity and not-near-me horror as guilt. Feeding them handouts without creating control methodologies (You want an easy living set up by robotics because you lack the social cohesion as intelligence to roll your own society? Fine! Get clipped after your first kid and we’ll give it to you.) to keep the resultant lemming race from carrying -us- over the cliff.

      Our subjective empathy is our own cognitive weakness because the world knows how to play us.

      And the result will be, if this continues, that whites will be 9.8 percent of the planetary population by 2050. And 4% _or nothing_ by 2100. And all our values as endurant supremacy of folkway will mean /nothing/ because we allowed ourselves to be flummoxed into feeding competing races genetic ‘quantity has a quality all it’s own’ breeding strategies without understanding that instinct is not kind. It has a coldly manipulative nature as an almost external life force looking to replace all competitors with it’s own genetic modality. That is what instinct does. That is ALL it does.

      In a world where global mass transport means there are no terrain isolates, there has never been a racial group which dropped below 10% of local territorial population base and returned to predominance of cultural self-determinism.

      Not one.

      NPI Population Predictionshttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovb5RZG9Jzk

      • I did not have any figures to pull out (especially as I was away from my home computer), so thanks for that. It is much worse than I had even thought, if those figures of population expansion are right. I have seen similar elsewhere in recent years, so I can imagine they would be.

        Regarding the White demographic, I have usually laboured the point that we are around 8% to 10% of the planetary figure, more likely to be around the 8% figure than the 10%. I have also seen it stated over the years that out of that 8%, only 2% are women still capable of having children.

        I have never seen the 16% figure, so I would be interested as to where this figure comes from (aside from the NPI) – not least so that I can be more factual when going about our crusade. I was convinced it was around 8-10% already.

        Although this may not be popular in some quarters, to some degree, I believe history has shown a ‘natural’ ebb and flow of demographic peaks and troughs – particularly in age structure and proportions within a society.

        For example, in England, it would not concern me too greatly if we were seeing peaks and troughs in a demographic number……providing we were homogeneous!.

        If we lost or gained a few million over a generation or so, I would not particularly be disturbed by that trend – other than the fact that we are being race-replaced and put in this ‘globalist’ system, with immigration, international aid, and all the rest of it.

        To have a collapsing ebb whilst the space is being pumped up with a flow of other races is nothing other than catastrophic for the host society. To have our people be brainwashed into and monetarily hoodwinked into having fewer children (not least a somewhat hedonistic ‘sex in the city’ culture being pervasive), is catastrophic.

        To use our wealth to prop up the birthrate of our replacers, to allow unstable societies to burgeoning out of control, to provide the bodies for immense and inconceivable scaled catastrophes (famine, flood, warfare, etc) and at the same time vacate our homelands and encourage “weak borders” to those unstable and burgeoning societies……well, it really is madness.

        • Lop_Eared_Galoot


          Allow me to broach an unusual argument with you.

          To use our wealth to prop up the birthrate of our replacers, to allow unstable societies to burgeoning out of control, to provide the bodies for immense and inconceivable scaled catastrophes (famine, flood, warfare, etc) and at the same time vacate our homelands and encourage “weak borders” to those unstable and burgeoning societies……well, it really is madness.

          Are you familiar with the concept of millenarianism?

          Millenarian groups[who?] claim that the current society and its rulers are corrupt, unjust, or otherwise wrong. They therefore believe they will be destroyed soon by a powerful force. The harmful nature of the status quo is always considered intractable without the anticipated dramatic change.[citation needed]


          For whatever reason, I believe there has been significant attempts by those in control of the media to create social psychologies which turn off the extroversive elements of racial conscience as enable life saving identity polarization among whites.

          I think whites, who have a native Social Altruism that arises from our need to interact as -small- groups, within our own genotype, to pass successful survival strategies as the intelligence and skillsets that make them work, are particularly vulnerable to intimations of guilt and empathy for outsiders because of how our people grew up, in isolated small bands of HG in Eurasia.

          Other Populations, with nominally lower IQ and a more base tribal identity as ‘shorter horizoned’ awareness of consequences to any given action, are not so vulnerable to this halo-denting intimidation as is expressed through the Hitler psychosis (Reductio Ad Hitlerum is a form of Ad Hominen attack on a people as their rationale for survival. It is employed, not to attack the ‘true believers’ butrather to disillusion their audience. Because any intimation that the speaker is giving false wisdom influence the perspective of those who -want- to treat the person with understanding but who also have an innate reputative fear of the untrustworthy as past bad behavior. It is deeply tied with our white honor system of trust giving as an innate bias against lies and so if you can get whites to believe that someone could be lying through their teeth on -one matter- then all their subsequent views are equally open to question if not outright disqualification.

          Hence, anything racial is instantly associated with Hitler, Nazism and Eugenics as the ultimate in demonic and dangerously inciteful behavior, despite the fact that whites put paid to those views ourselves.

          Other groups see this vulnerability and press the Halo Psychology panic button whenever they feel that we might wake up from the stupor of our induced racial guilt trip (slavery by less than 3% of the white population, ended by whites almost 150 years ago is another favorite memetic beat), to try and advance our own interests.

          OTOH, whites are conceptual artists more than anything and so what we dream is who we really want to be. Because of this, I study our film industry to see what our enemies use to lull us as well as challenge our pride-of-place ‘denial envy’ into condemning as ways out of our current quandary (I am convinced that we are not supposed to survive this, at all. In company with other races or alone…).

          As such, this is ‘Contact’.

          Note the 1997 release date for a story about initial communications with an advanced alien species as ‘intelligent design’ appealing motif. Aliens who in fact do nothing but give us a minor pep talk as one liberal woman takes a walk down a beach with her daddy. The meme is meant to engage a variant of the Millenarianist psychology of being saved from disaster by an all knowing external force. It is, in effect a Christian redemption theme by the ever deluded who hope that ‘this is the millenium’ when it their Lord will return and ruin the earth before sitting in judgment of the bad guys who are never them. As if that was a good thing…

          OTOH, this is ‘Elysium’.

          A film due to be released this year about the post 2012 environment in which the obvious failure of the Mayan calendar nonsense (a people who couldn’t be bothered to invent a wheel but still had a ‘circular logic’ view of time as history, stretching back to 243,000 years before they were present to view it!) to cast a doom upon us from cosmic alignments or whatever means that now a new fate must be crafted to for us to cling-to-our-fear.

          Indeed, the theme here is seen to be one where all things powerful and external have abandoned us, to include the rich whom we despise but secretly hope ‘have it all planned out’.

          And they do. In a space station that takes them beyond our petty minded viciousness. Included amongst these is a blonde haired Jodi Foster, ‘heroine’ of ‘Contact’.

          While the physics of lofting a multimillion ton habitat into LEO are unbelievable for cost or physics effects (orbital mechanic effects of something that large, that low and the presence of huge CBR being but two), the notion that there is in fact no god looking after our fates and that the ‘global citizens’ of the mega wealthy really are getting set to flee after selling the last of their /American/ possessions is quite possible.

          If you believe in things like Quantitative Easing causing a currency glut which undermines the economy with massive inflationary devaluation of the dollar. White wealth which has never experienced ethnic subversion up close and personal might actually be innocent enough to think that they could survive a world without a white population base to protect their money.

          And yet for all that, here is solid evidence of what I believe is whites actually WAKING UP to something more than guilt.

          Because, in monitoring the discussion forums for this film at places like IMDB, it becomes instantly apparent that white posters find the notion of our people living separate and clean lives to be an enchanting one and the idea that one (Matt Damon as a cancer victim) man can bring it all down with his greed to be the real issue of survival.

          While the minority posters (who quickly ran away after finding no sympathy) held the view that it was just not right that ‘one race’ should have the right to get away from the rest of the planet’s dilemmas.

          I cannot imagine what the response to this was among the Hollyweird leftist elites. I suppose they hoped to inspire jealousy among whites because a white was the designated hero being left out. Maybe they look to make whites appear racist because we enjoy the absence of ‘diversity’ among our own.

          That this notion backfired tells me a lot about white cultural values.

          Namely that there is still within us a striving for excellence as unified social awareness that ‘some of us may not make it’ but those who earn the right will bear our genes and not one drop of others.

          And of course, the pictured woman in the trailer who is among this elite, is white, blonde, apparently intelligent. And very beautiful.

          It must be driving the socialist libtards /nuts/ to realize that they haven’t killed our sense of ourselves even now after 60+ years of brainwashing.

          The question must then be: who will -dare- present this image as an achievable reality. A liveable dream. And challenge whites to create the geographic exclusion zone where it might be made to happen, here on Earth. With nano, geno and robotics threshold tech achievable within this decade, we could do this. We could be free of our slaves as the consumer market dynamic which requires them. Forever.

          And unlike the socialist liberal horror vision, I don’t think real white wealth (we ourselves) wants to abandon the white race to live in a land of Other Populations.

          • Very interesting, thank you. I am semi-familiar to some of the themes you are presenting, but admittedly it has not really been my forte or focus up to present. I had not heard of some of the terms before.

            When it comes to films, I do recall having my eyes opened to various sub-plots and themes by an author and article writer who sometimes features at the Counter-Currents site, who dissects the underlying messages. I cannot recall the name at the moment. The psychology at work in many of these things is astonishing when laid out bare.

            I do not have much else I can contribute as a reply at the moment, but relating to what we have been discussing earlier, I have seen these in the UK newspaper “The Daily Mail” today, which you may or many not want to reference with others:




          • Lop_Eared_Galoot

            I understand. Let me simply reiterate that ‘the psychology’ of the two films I compared was that of whites whilst still-slumbering through their own collective murder being told to continue snoring because they were doing such a fine job killing themselves.
            While a more awakened and aware population, fearing that the multicult social utopia that their leaders promised might not provide for all, indefinitely, equally, after all, are now given a more militant counter theme of “Just try and run away from these poor losers you’ve adopted against your better judgment, you evil white despots!”.
            Save a man’s life and you become responsible for him forever. If only because someone, somewhere, makes a lot of money representing his interests as theirs.
            What is interesting is that Jodi Foster, plays both hero and villain.
            I have read one of the articles you sent me. I’ll gladly provide you my initial impressions if interested but ask for a private point of contact. As I am new to social media and do not know how to reach you directly through DIscus, I do not want to impose on the hospitality of this site with a long post on a tangential theme.

  • Paleoconn

    I bet the British people aren’t proud Cameron’s British. Maggie Thatcher had more cojones than this doofus will ever have. I wonder if he thinks feeding these people will make them more viable imports into his country. Vile scoundrel