Cameron confronted on foreign aid by cancer sufferer

[-:Undertaker:-]

You know, rarely do you ever hear exchanges such as this because the media/political spin doctors won't allow these questions through - but here 'Anna' puts it plainly and simply to David Cameron and I found it rather moving.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2185338/He-looking-Britons-Cancer-sufferer-refused-treatment-NHS-forces-uncomfortable-PM-defend-12-billion-foreign-aid-bill.html

Cancer sufferer refused treatment by the NHS attacks David Cameron, forcing him to defend his £12billion foreign aid bill

- The treatment she needs to beat non-Hodgkin lymphoma is available in Europe but not in her area, she said.
- The 68-year-old used the name Anna because some members of her family don't even know she's ill.
- She accused the PM of sending money abroad that should be staying in Britain.
- 'We have a moral obligation to help people in other countries even when times are tough,' he replied in tense LBC interview.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJntu9ZIWDs&feature=player_embedded

A great deal on here will know i'm not even an advocate for more public spending in general, let alone on the NHS (which I don't even agree with as a concept anyway) - but when are sending £11bn+ a year to countries such as Zimbabwe so that ruling leaders can buy new cars, build lavish palaces .... it's unacceptable that taxpayers such as Anna are refused treatments while such wasteful spending is being done in other areas. I'd also note, as usual, that the Labour Party and Liberal Democrats are also committed to foreign aid just as the Conservative Party is.

"Foreign aid is taking money from poor people in rich countries and giving it to rich people in poor countries." - Ron Paul (also attributed to others)

Let's put the UK first.

Thoughts?

[MKR&*42]

I genuinely think it's ridiculous how much money our government seem to be handing out abroad these days. I fail to see why conservatives/labour/lib dems are in great support of a foreign aid bill which goes into the billions when an awful lot of the countries we hand money out to owe US money?

I would go as far to say that the U.K. is one of the most generous countries in the world - the amount we all collectively donate to charities, how much we pump into a useless system (the EU), the amount we give to other countries during natural disasters (I think it was around £23 million for the people in Haiti from the British public?) and obviously, the billions handed out thanks to this foreign aid bill. There's nothing wrong with helping out poorer countries (as long as their governments don't reap all the benefits...) but as said in the video, "there are people in the UK who can't even afford heating".

[Wig44.]

Y
...A great deal on here will know i'm not even an advocate for more public spending in general, let alone on the NHS (which I don't even agree with as a concept anyway)...
I haven't been in here in ages so I'm not familiar with your views. You don't agree with the NHS or you don't agree with public health care?

[-:Undertaker:-]

I haven't been in here in ages so I'm not familiar with your views. You don't agree with the NHS or you don't agree with public health care?

I don't agree with state healthcare, no. Although I know in the United Kingdom the NHS is a sacred cow (which we're told without, we'd be back to the days of daunting Victorian rat infested hospitals) which means it would be politcally impossible to end it at the present time. That said, one way of winding down the NHS and the state in general would be to introduce an opt-out of government services such as the NHS (along with state education, council services etc), similar to the one Ron Paul proposed in the United States where you would retain 90% of your earnings but pay for your own health, education and so on.

I much favour private healthcare systems such as the Singapore healthcare system or even our own system here, pre-NHS.