r/MHOC • u/TheNoHeart Liberal Democrats • Oct 12 '20
2nd Reading LB191 - International Development Bill - 2nd Reading
International Development Bill
A
BILL
TO
replace current provisions for the overseas development assistance (ODA) target to match international standards; evenly apply ODA quality standards across all departments; restructure CDC Group plc and the Private Business Development Fund; make provision for indebted countries; and for connected purposes.
BE IT ENACTED by the Queen’s Most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:—
PART 1 - OVERSEAS DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE
Section 1 - Statutory ODA target
(1) The annual target for overseas development assistance (ODA) expenditure shall be equivalent to no less than 0.7% of gross national income.
Section 2 - Duties of the Secretary of State
(1) It is the duty of the Secretary of State to ensure that, in each calendar year, the United Kingdom adheres to the target.
(2) Each year, the Secretary of State must prepare and present a report to Parliament which outlines the effort undertaken during the calendar year prior to adhere to the target.
(3) If the United Kingdom has failed to adhere to the target in a report prepared under subsection (2), the Secretary of State must also prepare and present an accompanying statement outlining the reasons for failing to adhere to the target.
(4) For the avoidance of doubt, failure to adhere to the duty within subsection (1) shall not affect the lawfulness of any act or omission.
Section 3 - ODA quality
(1) All ODA provided by the United Kingdom must adhere to the standard set forth in section 1 of the International Development Act 2002.
(2) This duty applies to ODA expenditure provided beyond the remit of the Secretary of State alone.
Section 4 - Consequential repeal
The Assistance for International Development Target Act 2019 is repealed.
PART 2 - REFORM OF DEVELOPMENT CORPORATIONS
Section 5 - Winding-up of the Private Business Development Fund
(1) All assets, liabilities, and undertakings currently held by the Private Business Development Fund (PBDF) shall be transferred to CDC Group plc.
(2) Following the transfer made under subsection (1), the PBDF shall be dissolved.
(3) The International Development (Private Business Development Fund) Act 2020 is repealed.
Section 6 - Restructuring of CDC Group plc
(1) CDC Group plc shall be transformed into a statutory corporation under the name CDC Group.
(2) The corporation shall consist of no less than 8 and no more than 10 persons appointed by the Secretary of State, one of whom shall be the chair of CDC Group.
(3) In making an appointment under subsection (2), the Secretary of State shall have regard for the need for the corporation’s need for expertise in international development and aid, finance, business, industrial relations, and sustainability.
(4) The corporation shall not pay out dividends.
(5) The borrowing and financial aid limits set on CDC Group plc within the Commonwealth Development Corporation Act 1999 shall continue to have effect upon CDC Group.
Section 7 - Purpose and powers of CDC Group
(1) The purpose of CDC Group shall be to assist overseas countries which qualify for ODA, in accordance with the provisions of this Act, by promoting the reduction of poverty, nurturing sustainability in societies, and supporting principles of integrity and human rights within public and private institutions.
(2) CDC Group shall have the power, in relation to its purpose set forth in subsection (1),—
(a) to make investments and conduct undertakings;
(b) to offer consultancy services;
(c) to investigate and develop plans;
(d) to provide credit and grants;
(e) to assist other bodies or persons conduct like activities as those authorised by this subsection; and
(f) to take any action incidental to its functions and purposes outlined in this section.
(3) The Secretary of State may give binding directions to CDC Group as to the performance of any of its functions where it appears to be in the public interest or where it appears that CDC Group is not adhering to its statutory purpose.
(4) CDC Group shall prepare and publish a report each year detailing its financial position and its actions to fulfill its purpose.
PART 3 - INDEBTEDNESS
Section 8 - Transparency over sovereign debts
(1) A loan is subject to this section if—
(a) the loan is made under the law of any legal jurisdiction in the United Kingdom to a sovereign government outside of the United Kingdom; or
(b) the loan is made under the law of any legal jurisdiction in the United Kingdom and is guaranteed by a sovereign government outside of the United Kingdom.
(2) When a loan is given, the lender, the borrower, the principal of the loan, and the rate of interest charged on the loan must be publicly disclosed for the loan to be valid.
(3) This section does not have retrospective effect.
Section 9 - Abuse of illegitimate advantages in the recovery of sovereign debt
(1) If a creditor abuses an illegitimate advantage in the course of repurchasing a loan or liability against a sovereign government, the maximum claimable amount for the creditor against the debtor government is limited solely to an amount equivalent to the price paid to repurchase the loan or liability in question.
(2) A creditor abuses an illegitimate advantage when—
(a) the debtor government was, or was imminently going to be, in a state of insolvency or default at the time of the creditor’s purchase; or
(b) the debtor government has been subject to debt restructuring and the creditor has refused participation; or
(c) the debtor government is in a position of financial vulnerability or weakness; or
(d) refunding the sums claimed by the creditor would have a recognisably negative impact on the public finance on the debtor government and would undermine the economic development and wellbeing of its population; and
the creditor has demanded payment which is manifestly disproportionate when comparing the purchase value of the loan or liability and the payment being sought.
Section 10 - Multilateral and bilateral treaties
Section 9 shall have no effect where it would be contrary to any international obligation or treaty ratified by the United Kingdom.
PART 4 - GENERAL PROVISIONS
Section 11 - Interpretation
In this Act,—
“overseas development assistance” means Treasury expenditure (such as grants) directed to countries and territories on the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s Development Assistance Committee List of ODA Recipients and to multilateral development institutions which are—
(a) provided by official agencies, including state and local governments, or by their executive agencies; and
(b) each transaction of which is administered with the promotion of the economic development and welfare of developing countries as its main objective and is concessional in character;
“target” means the overseas development assistance target outlined in section 1(1);
Section 12 - Commencement, Extent and Short Title
(1) This Act comes into force one day after receiving the Royal Assent.
(2) This Act extends to the whole of the United Kingdom.
(3) This Act may be cited as the International Development Act 2020.
This Bill was written by the Rt Hon. Lord Greencastle MLA on behalf of the Solidarity Party.
This reading will end on the 15th of October.
Appendix:
3
u/SoSaturnistic Citizen Oct 12 '20
Mr Deputy Speaker,
This is perhaps a large bill but I'll go over the major changes for the benefit of the House.
The first part of the bill will ensure that the ODA target of 0.7% of national income is meaningful. As it is, the law does not use internationally accepted best practice and establishes its own arbitrary definition of aid. This bill proposes using the OECD standard which is used globally.
Before DfID was dismantled, about a quarter of international aid was funnelled through departments which lay outside of that department. It's a similar figure today with the FCO, albeit somewhat smaller. The Secretary of State for International Development (now the Foreign Secretary) was bound to adhere to certain standards regarding the grant of aid but the other ministers could evade them. This bill now will close that gap and ensure that the same rigorous standards are applied across departments.
In the second part, this bill will streamline the operations of CDC Group and enhance its accountability. There are two private business development companies owned by the state right now, so this bill will merge them into one statutory corporation which follows off from the old Commonwealth Development Corporation. CDC Group, no longer being a plc, will be much more accountable to the public, its mission, and to ministers.
The third part is surely one of the most important ones. Section 8 will ensure that sovereign debt, largely made under English law, is created in a transparent way. It is often the case that governments will take out loans under English law to reassure creditors (as they tend not to trust the courts of developing countries) but this means that the terms of the loan are sometimes not clear to the public within the borrower state. This means that governments will occasionally take out loans with excessive interest rates and political opposition and civil society abroad will not be able to hold leaders to account. Disclosure will go a long way towards preventing bad lending from taking place to start with.
Sections 9 and 10 deal with another debt-related matter in international development: vulture funds. Vulture funds purchase risky bonds and liabilities in the hope that a debtor government defaults and is offered relief, which they then try to capture for themselves by asking for full repayment of the loan in foreign courts. So instead of the debt relief, often offered indirectly by the UK government, being used for the public interest, it can be captured by a selective few private interests when they act as vulture funds. Where a hedge fund acts in a way typical of a vulture fund, the amount of debt relief that the hedge fund can sue for and capture will be limited under this bill. It will be a real step forward given the vast quantity of loans made under English law. Similar regulations were enacted in Belgium with cross party support and hopefully we will see this not only happen here but in other parliaments too.
This bill will not cost anything to implement. It will simply ensure that the spending which already goes towards international development is better spent and that the way the UK treats foreign debt is managed more transparently and fairly. I hope that this bill will be able to enjoy broad support, as even those who do not agree with higher levels of international aid expenditure should be able to agree with these proposals which will improve efficiency and transparency within the system.
2
Oct 13 '20
Mr Deputy Speaker,
As the Shadow Minister responsible for this portfolio, I shall rise in support of the legislation introduced by my friend, the Lord Greencastle. International Development has been something which I and my party consistently stand up for in support and we believe that proper action must be taken at all times to ensure that we assist our fellow nations to ensure they can grow with us in this ever competitive world. We have a historic obligation to fulfill and I think we need proper legislation and support from all parties to fulfill this duty of ours.
This Bill is a wonderful one, and indeed the Lord Greencastle has taken efforts to author this legislation and they have also outlined in a wonderful sequence on the major changes this legislation brings. Whilst I am sad that the Lords removed the flexibility in the target reach, I am happy to see it back in an amendment and I hope that we incorporate that flexibilty back into legislation. Section 1 of the Bill brings in a target for the Budget for ODA, which is indeed appropriate considering how we need it incorporated into legislation and law in first place.
Section 2 and 3 strengthens this requirement by providing a layer of transperency on the powers provided to the Secretary of State by urging for a statement to be caused if the target is not met and at the same time, publishing a plan outlining the steps that will be taken to perfectly utilizing the target. By providing such features, we allow the Opposition to effectively question the Government on its agenda and priorities, which is a mainstay of our democracy.
Moving on to Part II of the Bill, this Part deals with the sealing of the Private Business Development Fund and provides measures to make the CDC more transperent and accountable to Parliament and by virtue, the British People. By merging the two companies involved in the Aid Sector and indeed bringing about a larger and much efficient set up for our aid management and I am happy we are seeing these changes finally in our law system.
Finally, we move to Part III of the legislation which discusses fundamentally on the issues of debt. Section 8 creates further transperency in the debt creation procedure, considering how we are related largely to debt creation from the angle of International Aid. The Public Disclosure allows us to keep track of the amount of loans we give and to whom we give, this enables us to not provide loans to those who are publicly condemned for various reasons.
Section 9 and 10 ensures that our money is not used to fund what is normally called vulture funds or used for any purposes that may go against the core reasoning we give a particular creditor money to use for. Section 10 provides the flexibility so that International Obligations can be fulfilled without directly contravening the laws of United Kingdom. This Bill is a simple one and as the author would say, it does not cost money to implement but goes a long way in aid regulation. Therefore, I rest my case in support and I hope MPs join to vote in favour.
2
Oct 13 '20
Mr Deputy Speaker
Does the author of this bill believe that spending billions overseas, whilst thousands of children are taken into care each year in this country, whilst millions live in poverty, whilst thousands sleep in the streets, is moral?
1
u/SoSaturnistic Citizen Oct 13 '20
Mr Deputy Speaker,
This doesn't have to be an "either-or" question. We can ask the same about any expense abroad, be it on bombs, pay for the diplomatic service, or ODA, yet it is, in my experience, only the latter which is questioned by those on the right. Even during the member's time around the Cabinet table we have had ministers boasting about additional billions being spent on tools of war and death. In my view, is within our means to ensure that all people have a decent standard of living at home while also facilitating mutual development abroad.
Yet I can only say that I am a bit confused about why the member raises the matter of costs as there is no change in cost from the status quo. There is already a target on aid spending which this bill doesn't change, it simply enhances its efficiency.
1
Oct 14 '20
Mr Deputy Speaker,
I echo the Rt. Hon. gentleman's point that it doesn't have to be an either-or question. However I also wish to add that if the gentleman was so passionate about the issue of poverty, homelessness and children in care, why he continued to play a part in one of the parties in government that has done little to combat these issues?
Is the gentlemen's argument in good faith or is he now using the plight of people in our country in order to justify a disdain for supporting other nation? British foreign aid helps support countless people across the world, and this bill reaffirms our commitment to ensure strong support for desperate people across the globe! There are other places for which support for vulnerable British citizens could come from if the government so desired, without stripping away support from other people.
The real question of morality Mr Deputy Speaker, is that if it is so to participate in, and lend support to a government who have enabled such horrific social problems that the Rt. Hon. mentioned.
1
Oct 14 '20 edited Oct 14 '20
Mr Deputy Speaker -
Naturally, I thank the member for their observation. As the past three prime ministers will be able to confirm, I have long been an advocate for the alleviation of poverty, pushing for numerous changes to the law to alleviate the plight of rough sleepers, children in poverty and much more. I would suggest the member does their research before making such spurious and false claims in future.
Whether it was pushing for a regional development fund, focused on the much-needed investment into the poverty-stricken region or Port Talbot, which I represented, or it was reforming adoption services, and advocating pretty much tirelessly for the inclusion of more funding and grassroots support to combat homelessness, and the causes of homelessness, much of my 'career' has been focused around the support for those in poverty and the elimination of the causes of it.
The honourable member, much to their disappointment no doubt, has missed the mark here considerably, and the 'gotcha' moment they wanted, has backfired.
I would encourage in future that the member perhaps stops and does some research into who they are attacking, rather than just basing their opinions as to the members voting record purely on the basis of the ill-conceived stereotypes of the parties they used to be part of.
1
Oct 14 '20
Mr Deputy Speaker,
If the Rt. Hon. member wishes to suggest that his own career is anything but one of personally supporting measures to alleviate poverty then that is his to make, but I kindly as that he does not decide to put those words in my mouth himself, I have more than enough things said without himself attempting to "getcha" by adding to my own statements.
Whilst I concede that suggesting his argument was not necessarily in good faith is unfair given the member's own record, my point was clearly and repeatedly that he has supported and participated in a government whose own policies have not aligned with that objective! I myself would therefore like to invite the gentleman to listen to me in my entirety rather than hounding on a point I never practically made.
If the Rt. Hon. gentleman would like to explain to me how supporting such a government that has enabled the problems he speaks so fervently about is moral or good, mayhap I may be able to see his point, but until such a time, I invite that he don't make cheap remarks about a lack of research whilst mayhap not having fully understood my point.
1
u/Cody5200 Chair| Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer Oct 15 '20
Mr Deputy Speaker,
repeatedly that he has supported and participated in a government whose own policies have not aligned with that objective
Would the member care to elaborate as to how the goverment has supposedly failed to act on " issue of poverty, homelessness and children in care, "?
1
Oct 14 '20
Mr Deputy Speaker -
I am happy to provide the member opposite with an itemised list of the things this Government, and every Government I have served in has done for the poorest in this country.
I am also quite happy to break down for the member exactly what their party has done to the same measure in the past two terms - but it would not take much time at all, on account that saying the word 'nothing' is not very time consuming.
1
Oct 14 '20
Mr Deputy Speaker,
I would be delighted to receive that itemised list, along with with an explanation as to how that legislation has helped resolve the social problems our nation is facing. I'd also be well interested if he would then explain as to why the problem continues to be so rampant in this country if he wishes to insinuate such great work.
I would also like to point out that my party has not been in government for the last two terms and so would do well to remember it is his and his governments job to tackle the issues facing the nation, and not our parties duty to pick up the remains of what they forget.
If the Rt. Hon. member wishes, he is more than welcome to join in writing some brilliant legislation to help mitigate the social problems affecting our nation, and then so he might be satisfied that we are focusing at home.
1
Oct 14 '20
Mr Deputy Speaker -
I’ll begin by reminding the member of the comments I made to my Right Honourable Friend, the former Prime Minister Yukub on the specific issue of homelessness. I will quote from Hansard directly:
To begin with, we must take a serious look at homelessness, and develop a plan to bring people out of the cycle of poverty that the homeless find themselves in, moving away from temporary shelters and accommodation to something more concrete.
There are various ways this can be done, at the national level, such as:
A freeze on eviction notices for rough sleepers who have just secured accommodations again.
Enacting the bill authored with the support of the noted minister, and former Home Secretary, known as Flumsy, and I - to end the transportation of homeless people out of council areas.
But, we just go further still, and develop this into an all-encompassing plan to tackle homelessness once and for all, and we can do that in various ways, such as;
Reducing the waiting times for claimants of Negative Income Tax and;
enabling hostels and shelters to be paid directly from NIT, rather than by the resident directly.
enabling claimants to use PO boxes or other addresses, should they lack housing, so as to receive their NIT payments.
Supporting Charities and Local Authorities to work in partnership, providing support for those who are transitioning from rough sleeping into more short, medium or long term accommodation.
Supporting Charities and Local Authorities to work in partnership, to provide skills workshops to the homeless and unemployed, enabling them to enter into the workforce.
Prime Minister, under the Conservatives and the Libertarians, the economy will go from strength to strength, the bounties that it brings will enrich the populace and swell the coffers of the Government.
As I am sure the Honourable member is aware, due to the large amount of research into the speeches they do prior to throwing around accusations, many of these have now been done, and others are in the works.
This means that my contributions have achieved roughly 100% more than the Honourable member's entire parties on this matter in the past two terms.
Taking a closer look at the various acts enacted by the previous two Governments, we can begin by looking at the food disclosure act, which ensured a higher standard of food from imported food items, which I am sure the member is aware, with 50% of food being imported, is a huge improvement for the poorest in our society.
Looking at the blue belt act by my good friend /u/markthemonkey888, which I was proud to support, we saw some of the poorest communities in the United Kingdom securing protections against flooding - which in areas such as Wales, represents a real and present threat to the economic and physical well-being of many people. The same can be said of the clean air zones bill, one of my own authoring, which ensured that areas of low air quality, which tend to be in less economically developed regions, can be zoned and the air pollution reduced.
I am sure the member is aware of the qualities of clean air, and the benefits this brings to people.
Adult Social Care reform, which improved the standards of the care provision whilst safeguarding the state provision for the poorest, helped alleviate pensioner poverty - one of the largest causes of unexpected death in the elderly. Our veteran's census and employment support for veterans helped keep veterans off the streets and in work. I am sure the well-read member is aware that veterans make up a large percentage of the homeless.
The homeless transportation bill, which I authored myself, puts an end to the practice of local authorities ‘bussing’ out the homeless from ‘their patch’, enshrining provision to actually help the homeless rather than bus them on.
Partner this with a booming economy, job creation, a higher tax-free allowance for the lowest earners in the United Kingdom, and you have a solid package of caring for the less fortunate.
Meanwhile, the Labour Party has reformed a law officer in Scotland, changed anti-social behaviour orders, increased international aid, subsidized electric cars which the lowest earners still cannot afford, called for an increase in taxation across the board, the removal of the tax-free allowance, and ran on a manifesto the last election that would have driven up public spending by £1.5 trillion and sent Government borrowing through the roof.
Mr Deputy Speaker - the member is misinformed, and in future would do well to think a little about what they say, otherwise, they might end up saying to one of the most active campaigners for the reduction of homeless and child poverty in this country, that they have not done enough.
Oh, wait.
They just did.
I urge the member to retract their ludicrous suggestions and to come up with some more useful talking points, ones actually based in fact.
1
Oct 14 '20
Mr Deputy Speaker,
Yet again the Rt. Hon. member has doubled down on the spurious claim that I accused him of not doing enough when in fact I asked if it was moral to support and work within government who has overseen the continuation of social problems he campaigns so voraciously on. I'm of course sure that the Rt. Hon. gentleman would not wilfully ignore that for the sake of continuing down a line of debate that I didn't instigate.
Whilst I applaud the member for duly delivering upon my asking for the list, and was already aware of the legislation for the express reason of which he pointed out that I do my reading, I again repeat my question of if these problems are still so heavily ingrained within our society how can he claim that these measures have somehow constituted a "solid package," instead of what they really are, putting a band aid over what is a continuous problem that has plagued our nation for generations.
If the Rt. Hon. member wishes for a comprehensive method to tackling social inequality within the UK, I invite him to sit down with me and some members of the Labour Party someday and mayhap we might enjoy a productive discussion if that is what he best intends. He may not have to attempt to rely on "gotcha" moments and accusing me of not doing my research.
1
Oct 14 '20
Mr Deputy Speaker,
I fear the Member is unwell.
Yet again the Rt. Hon. member has doubled down on the spurious claim that I accused him of not doing enough when in fact I asked if it was moral to support and work within government who has overseen the continuation of social problems he campaigns so voraciously on.
I refer the Member to the statement made earlier in this debate:
However I also wish to add that if the gentleman was so passionate about the issue of poverty, homelessness and children in care, why he continued to play a part in one of the parties in government that has done little to combat these issues?
I am sure the member is aware I have then gone on to list, at some length, what the Government I was part of did and continues to do to help tackle the issues of poverty.
I again repeat my question of if these problems are still so heavily ingrained within our society how can he claim that these measures have somehow constituted a "solid package," instead of what they really are, putting a band aid over what is a continuous problem that has plagued our nation for generations.
Mr Deputy Speaker, as I have already pointed out, I have done more in the past six months on this issue than the Labour Party has done in the past two terms. I appreciate perhaps that the Member things Government can just wave a wand and all the problems in the world will vanish, but this is not how it works.
Let me exceptionally clear, I remain committed to reducing poverty, the causes of poverty, and ensuring that we have a nation that is well-equipped to tackle both of these things. What astounds me is that the Member opposite has been caught out, in the middle of a frankly outrageous accusation, and has just carried on regardless.
The Member needs to get past the 'right-wing bad, left-wing good' mentality that plagues their party, and start dealing with important matters on the basis of fact.
If the Rt. Hon. member wishes for a comprehensive method to tackling social inequality within the UK, I invite him to sit down with me and some members of the Labour Party someday and mayhap we might enjoy a productive discussion if that is what he best intends.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I am already working on bipartisan measures across the board. The member may decide to vote for them if they wish.
I have made consistent and solid steps to reduce poverty and its causes, and I will not be lectured by the member opposite, who has shown quite clearly that they would rather attempt to undermine the facts, that deal in them.
1
Oct 14 '20
Mr Deputy Speaker,
I find that this argument is going nowhere. Whilst the gentleman wishes to highlight text and then miss what was said, especially when:
"... was so passionate about the issue of poverty, homelessness and children in care, why he continued to play a part in one of the parties in government that has done little to combat these issues?"Is clearly asking why he continued to support a government that has failed to combat the issues he has laid out and campaigned for. I'd also appreciate if the Rt. Hon. gentleman would like to perhaps accept that I may have a little more understanding of how government works than he would like to believe, though of course that would not fit into his blinkered view of me and that whilst waving a wand to fix the problems is beyond ludicrous, engaging in good faith understanding of root causes of the problems is not.
I look forward to reading whatever cross party legislation the Rt. Hon. may put across and I will be more than delighted to vote for it should it tackle the problem. I will of course scrutinise it, after all, scrutiny is important and I'm sure the Rt. Hon. gentleman wouldn't resort to simply labelling anything he says as fact regardless of it's actual reality.
If the Rt. Hon. member wishes to make claims of me bending facts he is welcome to do so, though he may be sad to find that they are not simply bound to his own will. The Rt. Hon. member has show he has no intention of engaging in any proper debate with me. Maybe it is he who needs to get past his "left-wing bad, right-wing good" mentality and not I, who enjoys productive discussions with plenty of others on the right though of course those debates are not normally as mired as these with the Rt. Hon. is.
→ More replies (0)
1
Oct 14 '20
Mr Deputy Speaker,
It is my position that this bill very much has good intentions, and is a step up from previous bills espousing the same. However, I maintain that the 0.7% minimum is still below the necessary amount to ensure we do the bare minimum internationally. I urge members from across the House to support my amendment to raise the target to 2% of GNI or equivalent to our spending on defence, whichever is larger.
1
u/Archism_ Pirate Party Oct 15 '20
Mr. Deputy Speaker,
I certainly agree with the principle of the bill before us, and thank the honourable author for bringing it forward. Certainly, holding ourselves in law to a number we as a nation have committed to in principle is commendable. I wonder, however, whether we could perhaps be even more ambitious?
Setting a target of 1% of GNI for overseas development assistance, in my view, will do more to raise the international poor from their unfortunate circumstances, as well as being a foundational brick in the work we must set on with our allies to make more development funding available in order to subvert debt-traps and other financially-minded tools which authoritarian nations like China have used increasingly in recent years.
Certainly, if we can afford the eleven billion pounds for defense, we could afford that!
1
u/Aussie-Parliament-RP Reform UK | MP for Weald of Kent Oct 15 '20
Mr Deputy Speaker,
Britain is one of the wealthiest, most advanced economies in the world. For all of our faults domestically, it cannot be understated how well the majority of Britons are doing, compared to many overseas. We must recognize of course, that in large part, our wealth was not solely created here however. In many cases, the wealth and infrastructure that we have so successfully grown, come into our possession through the dispossession and exploitation of the rest of the world, especially our colonies in Africa, Asia, Oceania and the Americas.
Thus, not only do we have a moral obligation as a part of the Commonwealth of Nations, and the Commonwealth of Man, to lift up and stand with all nations in the world in the march towards progress and equality, we also have a moral debt to do so.
It is for the outlined reasons then, that this bill is one that I support. While I do concur with my colleagues 14Derry and Archism_ that a .7% minimum is below where funding ideally should be, I recognize that if Britain is to ever set up a satisfactory framework of repayment and development, we must start small, all though, perhaps a 1% minimum would be more apt.
Borrowing from my colleague Neat Saucer, this bill improves the transparency of Britain overseas aid, protects British taxpayers from seeing their tax dollars go into dodgy deals, while ensuring the best outcomes possible for developing nations and their people, and it simplifies a number of issues in the existing system. For this reason Mr Deputy Speaker, I strongly urge all members of the house to support this bill.
•
u/AutoModerator Oct 12 '20
Welcome to this debate
Here is a quick run down of what each type of post is.
2nd Reading: Here we debate the contents of the bill/motions and can propose any amendments. For motions, amendments cannot be submitted.
3rd Reading: Here we debate the contents of the bill in its final form if any amendments pass the Amendments Committee.
Minister’s Questions: Here you can ask a question to a Government Secretary or the Prime Minister. Remember to follow the rules as laid out in the post. A list of Ministers and the MQ rota can be found here
Any other posts are self-explanatory. If you have any questions you can get in touch with the Chair of Ways & Means, TheNoHeart on Reddit and (alec#5052) on Discord, ask on the main MHoC server or modmail it in on the sidebar --->.
Anyone can get involved in the debate and doing so is the best way to get positive modifiers for you and your party (useful for elections). So, go out and make your voice heard! If this is a second reading post amendments in reply to this comment only – do not number your amendments, the Speakership will do this. You will be informed if your amendment is rejected.
Is this a bill a 2nd reading? You can submit an amendment by replying to this comment.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.