http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/UNTC/UNPAN016841.pdf

“Outsiders can help to strengthen the hand of the poor, at modest expense. The World Bank is particularly proud of its efforts to track spending on Ugandan primary schools. Between 1991 and 1995, it discovered, only 13% of funds allocated for schools ever reached them. “Ghost workers” gobbled up about a fifth of the money meantfor teachers’ salaries. These striking findings were widely published by schools and local newspapers: parents could find out how much money had been earmarked for a school, and how much had actually reached it. As a result, in 1999 and 2000, about 80-90% of funds reached the schools. The Bank’s survey, which cost $60,000, helped plug a leak in school spending worth over $18m.”

Corruption is also rife especially during times of war:

““It’s a starve-out-the-population strategy,” said one Western humanitarian official, who did not want to be quoted by name because he feared reprisals against aid workers. “If something isn’t done on the diplomatic front soon, we’re going to have a government-caused famine on our hands.””

Even grass roots medical care becomes questionable when donations aren’t properly distributed:

” The staff of rural schools and clinics, for example, have scant reason to do their job well. A study in Uganda led by Barbara McPake, of the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, found that in the typical public clinic, 76% of drugs “leaked” on to the private market, more than a quarter of them prescribed to “ghost” patients who did not exist. Donors, Ms McPake points out, would rather subsidise drugs than pay salaries. Hence health workers make their own money by selling the drugs for themselves. If they did not, the clinics might not have survived at all.

Clinics also levied “informal” charges on their patients, sometimes five to ten times the formal rate. Expectant mothers had to pay for the polythene sheet on which they gave birth; afterwards, they had to wash and return it. Patients who could not pay were routinely abused and occasionally assaulted. The authors heard of a newly delivered baby being “confiscated” until payment was made. Not surprisingly, the poor avoid public clinics if they can—which is just as well, because doctors staff them, on average, for fewer than 13 hours a week. “

Although this may be construed as an isolated case, the fact that african governments have such power is testament to the problems facing the current aid structure. Renewing Development in Sub-Sahara Africa by Delshaw and Livingstone outlines a few interesting points:

“Short comings in the provisions of agricultural research and extension services have contributed to poor agricultural performance in Sub-Sahara Africa (SSA). Given that research and extension in SSA have been relativly well funded in the past… the limited impact of these services is as much to the poor management of resources as to inadequate financing levels.”

Furthermore:

“Africa is the last remaining region in the world where official aid inflows outstrip private capital inflows, and they do so by a very large margin… And, at least for now, this massive quantity of aid does not seem to be helping African development.. aid has failed Africa, aid conditionally has failed … there is very little chance of recovery from failure under the current institutional arrangements.”

The key here is, the last 3 words: current institutional arrangements. Something needs to be done to bring a more practical side to the aid being delivered. I have no doubt that large amounts of capital is needed in Africa to rid itself of its problems and create a continent that actually gives its people a fighting hope of not living in a vicious cycle of famine, war, and corruption.

Investment troubles with aid:
“aid-induced investments are largely channelled via the recipient government. Government-organised investment projects not only breed corruption, they also expand the role of the state in the economy and provide incentives to block or slow down market-based reforms. In addition, there is no correlation at all between public investments and growth in Africa (Devarajan, Easterly and Pack 2002).”

This is why I support a different kind of thinking. I think your snipe about keeping my wallet/conscience intact is pretty uncalled for, and beside the point. Foreign investment is needed, but quantity isn’t going to make change, its quality. A mentality change at the cultural level needs to occur. Removing trade blockages, freeing up resources, reducing corruption, and encouraging a perpetual cycle of education should be the fundamental keys. I fear that developmental aid may become an exercise in marketing and political showiness, and crucial structural problems will never get addressed, and in 25 years time, we will be exactly where we are now. Malawi demonstrates big strides can be made using simple ideas, like changing in the thinking of subsidies (which the world bank has ignorantly declined Africa from using, while the western world still uses subsidies on its own farms, a double standard in its sharpest form).

However, it is a fantasy that foreign aid makes only a small positive difference to the destitute of the world.

If you are so sure of your opinion, give $10,000 to World Vision or some other charitable organisation and if that money ends up in the hands of some corrupt government official I’ll give you $20,000. I don’t think you really believe what you say and I am certain my bank account won’t be down $20,000. Since when did right-wingers such as yourself believe anything from the UN anyway? Which UN reports support your claims about foreign aid?

It’s convenient to claim that foreign aid does no good if you want to keep your wallet and conscience intact.

Oh, and much foreign aid already promotes sustainable solutions, such as digging of wells and provision of vital infrastructure, without which there would be no hope of properly functioning markets.