Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Government to cut aid to anti-gay countries

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. I’m fine with this. I’m sure people will protest that we are trying to return to the Empire and trying to export our values. Tough. I don’t want to give anyone a single penny if they will use it to persecute LGBT people. It’s about time we put conditions on the money we give away. If they are adamant in their intolerance, if they are so tangled up in their religious claptrap (given that religion is behind it) then they can ask their damned religion to give them help…

    1. “We only provide aid directly to governments when we are satisfied that they share our commitments to reduce poverty and respect human rights.”

      Music to my ears… :)

      1. Hah

        How many Deaf anf disabled people are being turfed out of their centre or have their benefits cut? How many people will lose their jobs and homesand be in poverty while the bankers have made off will trillions. hypocrites

        1. Relevance to international aid vs human rights???

          1. morality? How can we tell the world how to live when we let people die cause they cost too much? Govt cuts will put a lot of people on the street

          2. So, we can’t set ethical standards when we send aid because we cut peoples benefits or there are spending cuts on some local services … get real!

          3. The is exactly the point. The uk should sort it business out before telling the rest of the world how to live. The bankers have billions of pounds given by our taxes and QEand they kept it to themselves. It’s immoral and don’t let me get started on murdoch, we are in no position to set moral standards

          4. But the point is that international aid is in the interest of the UK both in terms of tangible benefits from trade and from intangible in terms of gaining or retaining allies, security, prestige, image etc etc

          5. How shallow

          6. I dont think helping our own country whilst simultaneously helping others is shallow …

            UK aid whether government led or through charities often is based on encouraging economic growth and independence or interdependence (or emergency aid)

            No country is morally perfect. Every nation, like every person will make mistakes or errors of judgement. That does not mean that those who make mistakes can not have a moral view on others and decide to withhold aid or support from those who actions they find morally repugnant.

            The actions of the UK government to reduce or suspend aid of those harming LGBT people is both legitimate and appropriate.

      2. Derek Williams 12 Oct 2011, 1:42pm

        I also am fine with it. I know there are strong arguments adduced against it in terms of further impoverishing an already stricken population, and the risk of further scapegoating of LGBT but they’re getting this anyway. If they don’t want their aid cut, they know what they have to do. The choice is theirs, not ours. I won’t put my hand in my pocket to aid them until they eradicate anti-LGBT discrimination.

  2. I dont think thats fair. Dont get me wrong, i hate what those countries do to people who are gay, but people are dying of starvation, its not fair to punish them for what their government does. then again, thats just my opinion

    1. But you can’t assume that the funding is for famine relief, just because the countries are in Africa. It is certainly true that many of the people in the countries listed are in poverty, but you simply cannot think that everyone is dying of starvation. Of course, given the extent of poverty, perhaps the governments of the countries in question could devote what resources they do have to helping people rather than passing anti-LGBT laws and persecuting them.

      1. Not to mention that fact that HIV infection rates are amongst the highest in the world within Africa countries and the money is clearly not being used for education and prevention of the disease.

    2. If the government has money to persecute gay people then clearly they have enough money to feed their population.

      And remember in places like Uganda and Ghana the homophobia of the government is shared by the vast majority of the population.

    3. foreign aid takes from the poor in the first world to give to the rich in the 3rd.

    4. I understand that it can be seen that aid is meant to be targetted to the people of the country in terms of infrastructure development, economic aid and improving access to basic resources etc. However, whilst some gay people (and non gay) may theoretically suffer from the withholding of aid, what other forms of influence are there for the UK when diplomacy has not worked. Sometimes if the carrot doesnt work, you need to use a stick of some kind. Its morally appropriate for the UK government to take this stance.

    5. Anengiyefa 10 Oct 2011, 4:18pm

      Well, those people are starving largely due to the ineptitude of their governments in the first place, those same incompetent governments to which the judicious use of foreign aid is often entrusted.

      1. From what I’ve read in the Human Rights Watch Annual Reports, it’s difficult for us to imagine the amount of corruption that exist in the power structures of the African countries.

        The chasm between rich and poor is appalling, and we have every right to question if aid money is reaching its target or not.

        This is very good news and I expect it to make international headlines.

  3. It’s about bloody time too!

  4. Great news,
    Countrie that have the resources to persecue the gay community, clearly do not require international financial aid.

    And the homophobia in dumps like Uganda is not limited to the government – the murderous homophobia is shared by the population.

    I do not want a single penny of my tax money going to a place like Uganda.

    1. i’ll believe it , if it happens, which i doubt.

      1. So what makes you doubt it?

        Do you doubt the diplomacy towards Malawi, Ghana and Uganda recently?

        Do you doubt the actual reduction in aid to Malawi (partly related to LGBT rights issues)?

  5. Good! But the government still supports countries in the middle east which openly persecute women. How can we expect gay rights to be heard when even women don’t have basic rights?

    1. I agree, Andrew. And see no reason why we cannot have a policy covenant attached to any and all aid we give. I’m tired of Britain trying to be nice and play social worker and think we should make it clear that we have expectations – and one of those expectations should be, don’t treat half of your population like garbage…

      1. The Middle Eastern countries like Iran; Saudi; Libya etc does not receive British aid. They have British trade.

        Therein lies the difference.

    2. Because places like Saudi Arabia have oil.

      Saudi Arabia does not require international aid like Uganda.

      However we need oil and buy it from them.

      It’s a pity but Saudi does not need British aid; nor even oil revenue. They have PLENTY of money and plenty of places to sell their oil.

      Somewhere like Uganda needs international aid to feed their population (or so they claim). Yet they can waste plenty of time and money persecuting gay people.

      THat money to Uganda must stop. Britain gets NOTHING in return. And we are funding persecution.

      1. dAVID,

        We do get things in return – bigoted pastors, a trade in young boys who are sacrificed to exorcise demons, megachurches for the half christian/half black magic religion and African gospel choirs.

        On second thoughts – stop the cash.

  6. I despise these countries attitudes and actions against gay people, of course. But I dont think people should be punished for what their government do. I would need to see proof that the governments stance on gay people is also a commonly and widely held opinion of the people.
    Also, I cant help but think that without money, there will be a lack of good education and we all know that good education is one thing that can really make a difference to attitudes. Opinions on gay people could move on in these places if they had access to good education. Denying this may continue the problem for generations

    1. If you wish to see evidence you should watch the BBC documentary. I think they did an entire series ”Worst place to be…” And one was ”gay”. The episode was all about Ghana and the new execution of gay people law the Governent was trying to bring in.

      One particular part of the episode might shock you, where the presenter was on the street asking the publics opinion, and everyone shown was against Gay people… You could argue edited bias, but that sequence combined with the rest of the episode was enough proof for me. They went to a school and children were calling for gays to be arrested/killed! They showed the national newspaper, front page was an entire spread of known homosexuals who were in hiding and if you see them you should report them. Oh and let’s not forget the individual interviews with gay men and women, they’re stories of abuse, prison, family abandonment and corrective rape were appalling!!

      If you need the evidence, really, go watch it!

      1. Lloyd Copper 10 Oct 2011, 12:03pm

        It was shocking…but it was Uganda, not Ghana….:)

        1. Ooops my mistake! :p

    2. The people of Uganda share their government’s homophobia. The reason the US churches were so successful in spreading their genocidal message in Uganda was because the population agreed with the message in an overwhelming manner.

      Don’t kid yourself into thinking the people of Uganda do not share their government’s bigotry. I do not want my tax money going to places where the majority of the population wants me dead.

    3. It is a widely held belief aim afraid. I say this as a half Sudanese, half Irish gay man who grew up in the company of family members from the sudan and Uganda. I approve of this proposed action by the UK government.

  7. This should be standard policy for all governments giving aid. Meet our Human rights criteria,or miss out! What sort of message do we send to a country that pursecutes a section of its own society and is then ‘rewarded’ with money from another!? Crazy! If they can put time, money and effort into persecuting sections of their own country, then perhaps they are not as poor as they make out! Aid should never be given as cash,only as food, shelter, medicine,health advice and CONDOMS! Why do poor families keep bringing more children into a world surrounded by poverty and a lack of food? I just don’t understand the mentality of bringing a child into the world knowing that its chances of survival are poor at best! Is this religion sticking its oar in again? Millions of our overseas aid budget never reaches its intended target anyway through the corrupt governments we give it too. Persecution must never be rewarded.

    1. So true. These countries have signed human rights agreements and they are ignoring their commitments.

    2. Ironic that under Bush, due to religious pressure, aid to Uganda for HIV was made conditional on it being the no condom, abstinence only approach. Oh, and running it was the notoriously homophobic poo-poo pastor. (Famous quote: “do you want homosexuals to eat the poo-poo of our children ?!!”). No HIV aid was given to gays.

  8. This is more empty rhetoric from the torys, i’m so bored of hearing of their consultations on policies i.e gay marraige, human rights for those who behave humanely etc ,never coming to fruition. Torys promised to deal with britains immigration crisis, but now its at a 6 year high.

    1. Dealing with immigration issues takes time. The process is not instantaneous.

    2. I hardly call stopping aid to Malawi and active strong diplomacy to Ghana, Uganda, Kenya and others (with the promise of robust action if conditions do not improve) empty rhetoric …

      In fact I call “never coming to fruition” complaints given recents events much more rhetorical than the active stance the coalition has taken on aid and LGBT issues

  9. These Western nations who are throwing the world into crisis and still stand there to open their mouth should go to HELL. Keep your aids and keep the world out of financial crisis

    1. “keep the world out of financial crisis” – What a simplistic view given Western countries are bankrolling most of the rest of the world.

      “Keep your aids” – Okay. Starve then. When when you and your family are dead, you can do so in the knowledge you have principles, and we can use OUR tax money to further countries that want to live in the 21st Century.

    2. Sure thing.

      The western world will be more than happy to let Africa fend for itself.

      Africa does not need aid. Hurrah.

      Have fun begging from China.

      1. Actually i have a friend from Angola who tells me the Chinese are investing as equals rather than giving aid

        1. Not entirely true …

          There is a lot of investment from the Chinese … however, the contracts are very much biased in favour of the Chinese and some african countries that have sought to negotiate terms which would keep 50% of the wealth generation in their country have been dismissed by the Chinese (and Indians)

          1. That may be true have you got any links? What ever the deal is it is better than aid which creates nothing but dependency

          2. @James!

            I will try and dig out the news story I was reading a few weeks ago about this and give a link in a reply shortly

          3. @James!

            Not the story that I was looking for but sufficiently calls into question the integrity of the Chinese African involvement

            http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/22/world/africa/22namibia.html?pagewanted=all

          4. Yep not ideal but better than aid

    3. This statement doesn’t make any logical or grammatical sense. Try organising your thoughts before you post!

  10. Seems fair to me. Giving money to countries with poor human rights seems like a reward for being naughty. Not sure I want any part of my taxes to go to a country that persecutes LGBT people. Haven’t seen/heard of any other effective solutions. Doesn’t help when the CofE and the Catholic church , which I feel must have strong ties in these countries, come out with anti gay comments in the UK and I feel the church of England doesn’t condemn these countries as much as it should in fear of splitting the church. Don’t understand where the 19bn figure to Malawi comes from, is this an international policy that the UK has signed up to or just a UK policy?

  11. The cut in aid to Malawi was 19 million, according to another news site, not 19 billion, which would be more than our total aid budget for the world.

    1. Jessica Geen 10 Oct 2011, 11:47am

      Apologies – error corrected.

  12. A step in the right direction let us now see it in action

  13. At last and about bloody time! Well done to our Government.

  14. I don’t think aid should be given to foreign governments at all because there seems to be evidence of too much corruption.

    There should be another system all together (globally run) whereby third party organisations, who are independently monitored and audited, are given money to use to ensure that people in developing countries have access to clean water, food, sanitation education and housing.

    This would ensure governments aren’t lining their own pockets or investing in arms and space programmes etc. whilst the majority of people in their country live well below the poverty line.

    1. There’s an argument that some aid just props up bad governments and prevents countries empowering themselves to fend for themselves.

  15. Good move IMO. But I doubt it will stop these barbaric nations persecuting innocent individuals.

    1. Another Hannah 10 Oct 2011, 3:02pm

      maybe not, but at least it won’t be our money being used to do it

  16. It is about time that the Government done something like this. I do not want one penny of my money going to countries were gay people are widely persecuted by both their governments and the people of the country.

  17. I think the UK Goverment should cut aid to ALL COUNTRIES full stop.

    1. I think we have a moral responsibility to aid those countries in need of it through natural disaster, famine etc etc and also to encourage economic growth …

      It also has implications in terms of building diplomatic relations and developing understandings which improves trade for the UK and security … International aid has more benefits for the UK than the individuals in the countries which are targetted …

      1. Aid does not encourage growth it creates dependency.

        1. That entirely depends how the aid is targetted …

          There are plenty of good examples of aid fostering independence and interdependence rather than reliance …

          In some circumstances there is a need eg natural disaster, famine etc where the primary aim is not necessarily independence and trade but human survival …

          1. Emergency aid is not the same as the constant supply of western clothes and dumping subsdised EU and US foods destroying local companies. EU dumped italian tomatoes in Ghana and the EU & US selling nilk powder cheaper than the locals can produce in Jamaica,

            They mess these countries up and then wonder why theya re so violent

            http://eurostep.antenna.nl/detail_pub.phtml?page=pubs_position_coherence_jamaicad
            http://eurostep.antenna.nl/detail_pub.phtml?page=pubs_position_coherence_jamaicad

          2. @James!

            I do not deny the examples you give. Naturally none of those examples are fantastic evidence of good practice in aid to those countries which arguably need it.

            That said, there are plenty of other good examples of the use of international aid to either assist in an emergency situation or to develop the nation in a manner which encourages interdependence and independence in the hope that aid will be less likely to be required in future.

  18. I wish the Government would stop interfearing in other countries and let them get on with running THEIR country by THEIR laws.

    1. Another Hannah 10 Oct 2011, 3:01pm

      they do – they just don’t get our money to subsidise them, tehn they can do what they like can’t they

  19. Good. About time too. These anti-gay places should be starved of every single bit of help and aid they get from us, strangle their support and they will shut up.

    Then they can plead to Mr Invisible Sky Lurker for help.

  20. Also the money not given to anti-gay countries, should instead be given to LGBT charities.

  21. This is a bad idea, a rationalistic solution to an irrational problem. Financial incentives may force change on the surface, but homophobia has deep roots. Changing people’s actions is easy with money; changing their minds takes respect, dialogue and deliberation. Not to mention the backlash likely to result from Western rich countries, still widely seen as imperialists, imposing their views on poor but proud countries.

    1. Another Hannah 10 Oct 2011, 4:33pm

      they will not even begin to think about or consider this unless there is some need to do so – what you say here makes no sense. and they think this that and the other of us? so what? and they probably did anyway. its our money and we don’t have to give a damn thing if we don’t want.

  22. whymewhyme 10 Oct 2011, 2:58pm

    a difficult issue – on one side i think that the cuts are part of a general reduction and the gay issue makes it ok – on the other, i don’t think that giving aid should be without conditions – what would be particularly appreciated would be that even small donation could be made by gov to gay organisations in such countries – ILGA – for instance. This would underline the commitment to human rights without withdrawing all support.

    unfortunately lots of aid is given with religious conditions. and not giving at all will just make exodus the only solution and that will lead to asylum seekers elsewhere.

    if aid is cut for reasons – it should be give but elsewhere

  23. Another Hannah 10 Oct 2011, 2:59pm

    excellent news. no country should be given money to perpetrate atrocities on its people.

    1. Like Lybia? The new regeim is killing black people and when the muslim brotherhood is in power expect the sae thing to happen to LGBT people

      Like Iraq? LGBT people were better off under Saddam

      1. I remain unconvinced that LGBT people were better off under Saddam, as much as I disagree with the second Gulf war, the monstrous regime that was Saddam was horrific for gay and non-gay Iraqis

        1. Don’t take my word for it

          http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8133639.stm

          Investigating reports of the murder and torture of gay men in Iraq, Ashley Byrne found that some gays found Saddam Hussein’s dictatorship preferable to the threat of violence they face today. Some readers will find parts of his report disturbing.

          1. I accept that story and others based on the same or similar reports. However, whilst I am not aware of any which suggest that Iraq has become a beacon for LGBT rights in the Middle East since Saddam was overthrown ;-) there are other reports which suggest the changes are sometimes for the better – although clearly there are still significant human rights abuses reported.

            http://www.neareastquarterly.com/index.php/2010/11/28/pride-and-prejudice-the-targeting-of-gay-men-in-iraq/

  24. That aid money doesn’t go to the people earning less than a dollar a day anyway, it goes to shiny new private jets and cars for the rich elite in government. We should do away with aid to governments altogether, it’s totally pointless.

    1. And let’s not forget that in places like Uganda the people earning less than 1 dollar a day are also vicious, homophobic bigots.

    2. And where do they but the jets? The money the steal is in banks in London and Zurich

  25. I too, am pleased with the reduction in aid to these homophobic countries. Can we now stop deporting gay men and women back to said countries.

  26. The Southern Baptist missionaries from the United States go to Africa where they preach “death to gays.” It’s too bad those American missionaries continue to get away with their hate-mongering. As long as the U.S. government is in the hands of the Religious Reich fundies, the hate will continue to be exported. Graduates of Pat Robertson’s law school are moving into jobs in Federal agencies as part of the KKKristianizing of the U.S. That’s why the U.S. is so far behind the U.K. in protecting gays.

    1. Excellent point.

      It is a fact that the American government is being christianized by extremists, and more than half of the American population believes that Jesus will return to earth in the next 50 years.

      American missionaries to Africa do promote homophobia clearly rooted in the Old Testament.

      Far too many people believe that one of their books was written by God.

    2. Africa is ENTIRELY responsible for its own bigotry.

      It is all too convenient to blame the US cults.

      Africa needs to take responsibility for its bigotry and if it refuses then ALL aid needs to be cut.

    3. Sister Mary Clarence 11 Oct 2011, 7:44pm

      I think if you check back in African history you will see that it was missionaries that caused the whole problem in the first place. Gay people had a place in African society until the God squad came in in the first half of the last century, preaching hatred and intolerance and the equality and respect that gay people enjoyed in Africa was destroyed.

      Homosexuality is not a Western disease as African preachers are so often telling their flocks, homophobia is.

  27. Good! I applaud the Government for taking this stand. I have no issue with maintaining the aid budget but I have a massive issue with giving money to Uganda and other countries that violate the human rights of LGBT people.

    1. Father Jock 11 Oct 2011, 12:35am

      And in those countries people are persuaded to part with a month’s salary to attend a mass rally given by the homophobic American pastors. Why should we be paying for this?

  28. This is a positive actions on behalf of the uk, parliment, the united states should be doing the same thing, all African countries and militant countries , that murder , harrass and abuse and falsely arrest the lgbt community and other like women out of discriminations and hate crimes, should not receive any money support at all from either one and no one, you do not aid terrorisma and murder and violence, you must take serious actions and military actions against terrorism, hate crimes and bigotry is at the highest level in all countries but it is filled to the top in African barbaric and uncivilized countries, like south africa Zimpbawae, ughan, and others, they all must be seriously sanctins and reprimanded for their violence against thier families and country human right and humanity, the governments ansoldiiers and police forces are the ones at fault following orders from dictator militant goverments that are going to have to be taken out like libia, and overhauled for the people

    1. I’m sorry but are you dyslexic or is English not your first language? Just curious thats all. No offence intended.

  29. The children and women they deserve better, they deserve a peaceful country where the hidieous evil men are not killing their children and rapping them everyday, the men in their African countries are uncivilized except for the gay ones, they parliments must be wiped out and replaced with grandmothers and who care about their countries, and gay officials who dont want to harm anyone and dont codone violence, they are peaceful people unlike the hetersexual men who are monsters of evil and terrorism their , you must make sure that the african goverments are not doing what sadam hussein was doing by hoarding all the food and clothes from governments in humanitarian aid into ware houses for themselves and their soldiers, you must send people down their to make sure constantly under human rights watch for the people, making sure it is the government and police forcses down their they must pay for the murders and abuses of the people crimes against humanity, an arest the presidents of them

  30. The point of giving aid to poor countries is to help their citizens. That means ALL their citizens, not just the ones that a particular recipient government deems fit. The homophobia that is widespread in these countries can be ameliorated by a change in attitude from their governments. It happened here in the UK with laws protecting people from ethnic minorities making racism socially unacceptable, laws protecting gay people is making homophobia socially unacceptable. Ten years ago, an anti gay comment made to work colleagues may well have generated murmurs of agreement – at best it would get an uncomfortable silence from the more “right on” present. Today it would result in disciplinary action. Governments do have an important role in sending a message to their populations as to what is and is not acceptable. We have every right to withdraw support for behaviour we regard as unacceptable.

  31. I’m torn while i think these attitudes need to be sorted out. Cutting funding for health care and education is mean spirited and shortsighted. Education is the only way to combat anti gay attitudes and letting people die will not make people accept gay people. Remember some gay people will benefit form the aid too.

  32. From what I’ve read in the Human Rights Watch Annual Reports, it’s difficult for us to imagine the amount of corruption that exist in the power structures of the African countries.

    The chasm between rich and poor is appalling, and we have every right to question if aid money is reaching its target or not.

    This is very good news and I expect it to make international headlines.

    1. Its true but these theives would not be able move a penny without help of european and american banks

    2. Corruption is certainly an issue. Keep in mind that last year we had to suspend aid to Malawi because the cabinet of their government bought a bloody plane with it… A country like Malawi exports a tobacco crop worth hundreds of millions, and yet many live in poverty. As is always the case, someone gets fat and wealthy off the sweat of others. Perhaps it is time the others stood up for themselves against it.

      1. Where did they but the plane? How was the money transfered? They are all in on it

  33. My only concern about it, is that those gouvernement will may try to make people believe that all that it is the gays fault, all this money they loose just because they exist. So as human being is some extra conservator will just kill those gay.

  34. The reason aid is sent

    1. EU & US dump surplus subsidised foods and destroy local markets
    2.EU & US sell arms to their prefered leaders
    3 EU & US send chrity clothers destriying local markets
    4. Aid and charity money is sipohned off not only by corrupt leaders but corrupt charity owners.
    5. African countries are not paid a fair wage for raw materials that we use in Pc & phones.
    6.By creating dependency african land can be bought on the cheap for EU and Indian companies to grow cash crops like sugar and palm oil ruining the local eco system.

    http://www.globalissues.org/article/10/food-aid-as-dumping

    At least China is building infastructure and treating africans as equal partners rather then the patronising them with low expectations China is good news for African countries.

    1. If you look at this DfID document, (with which they can be held accountable for their own stated aims) you will see the aims and objectives of international aid on a country by country basis:

      http://www.dfid.gov.uk/Documents/MAR/BAR-MAR-country-summaries-web.pdf

      I fail to see how any of the reasons you given above have anything to do with protecting innocent civilians and reducing sexual violence in DRC Congo or with improving maternal care and reproductive health in Kenya (to give just two examples).

      1. My argument is that aid is a problem when countries are sucessfull minorities get better rights. Aid is bad for growth.
        The EU and US should not be dumping foods in these countries are destroying the local economies.

        http://www.csae.ox.ac.uk/conferences/2010-EDiA/papers/052-Amikuzuno.pdf

        1. What I am suggesting is that you are portrayed a biased view of aid and it purposes or successes.

          If you look at the document I have provided you will see that the target programmes are proncipally about improving economic performance locally and regionally as well as improving human rights.

          Dump programmes do not form part of the DfID aid programme.

          1. and i see no evidence that aid works. Aid hase been dished out for decades and nothing has been resolved. Stop exploiting the countries, stop dumping cheap food and let the manage their own economies

          2. The position of a number of countries that we have supplied aid to has improved … some have not …

            Ethiopia is a country which is economically far better since the UK, USA and others increased both economic and emergency aid in the 1980s.

            A good example of aid being effective (linked to interdependence and independence and utilisation of own resources) is Botswana. In the 1960s Botswana was one of the poorest countries in the world. In 2004 as Botswana had achieved IMF middle income status, the UK government withdrew its aid deeming it no longer necessary. Botswana had developed industries including its diamond resource, financial services, tourism and others.

            There are other good examples of aid being withdrawn because of economic success, or of aid being reduced due to economic progress.

          3. Sub note – Ethiopia did have a blip in the 1990s but has begun to improve again.

          4. Botswana is rich cause they have a lot of diamonds. The Kalahari bushmen have been forced of their land to make a few people rich including Debeers.

            nothing to do with aid bad example!

          5. Diamonds certainly have an impact on the Botswanan economy but so does trade and financial services and tourism which were encouraged by the aid from the very poor country. The reserves of diamonds were discovered through exploration funded by aid. Good example of aid working and then not being required. The issue of the bushmen is wrong but separate from the aid issue.

          6. Correction aid FOR the very poor country

            Botswana used to be one of the poorest nations in the world and is now a middle income country – success of aid being part of the solution

    2. The families of many unpaid workers who were shot when they complained that their Chinese boss wasn’t paying them might disagree with you.

      1. We are grown ups here substantiate your claims

  35. This is excellent news, it’s what’s needed!…now they need to do the same with countries who’s other human rights stink too! They say money talks, so hopefully he lack of will do the same.

  36. And the moral of the story is, if you want money from british taxpayers, don’t be homophobic.

    1. Which seems an entirely reasonable approach that many have suggested for some time

      1. and now that it’s being done, we hear complaints… aaaaaagh !!!!

    2. Unless you’re a Cardinal or bishop.

  37. The ConDemned govt is becoming more and more populist to appease the nasties and deceive the ignorant. The AID industry which helps the poor being singled out and penalised. Meanwhile Bullyindom gang members will still be able to profit selling weapons to AID the massacre.

    1. Nasty weapons like the land mines all over Angola and they bank their cash in the UK too. I don’t agree with aid I prefer fair trade

      1. I don’t agree with aid either, but I find it deeply hypocritical, opportunistic and unfair to single out the most vulnerable industry for populist reasons.

        1. Come on in the Uk the old and disabled are having their benefits cut. These con dems are pure evil and these nasty queens who love them should be strung up

  38. I know his daughter! Claim to fame.

  39. If you’re going to cut aid to Africa (while adversing for people to make donations via party political broadcasts) then you might as well do it in a way that increases your popularity…. An which African countries are not homophobic other than perhaps South Africa??

  40. Good stuff. I dont want a penny of british money being squandered on often corrupt goverments that are pro hatred!

    The reality, reviewing governments is a good step. But that not to say your reviewing the people of that nation, there still be homophobic and government bodies will keep quiet and turn a blind eye to it, allowing LGBT to be tourtered and killed by people eating food, drinking water and recieving medical care on British Pounds :(

    1. Or spending it on mass rallies for American evangelicals?

  41. All these things the Tories are doing, Labour would never touch this sort of thing. Tories are really showing Labour up with forward thinking in gay rights :o

    1. This is a coalition government…

      1. Sister Mary Clarence 12 Oct 2011, 5:03am

        Well sort of

    2. Until they repeal everyone’s human rights.

      1. We will still be covered by the European convention on human rights – the HRA 1997 was just a formalisation of that and UK government had been found in the wrong on many occasions in the European (nothing to do with EU) court on human rights prior to the act. That said, I dont think the act should go, the interpretation of the act needs to be put in check. However, I am not concerned about any less protection for citizens if the act is removed and suspect they will bring in a bill of rights as clarity in any instance.

      2. Sister Mary Clarence 12 Oct 2011, 5:07am

        I think you’ll find that’s just a bit of left wing propaganda. The Human Rights Act has proved to be a bit of a cover all for anyone to use if they don’t like something. A bit of rationalisation is probably overdue now we have seen the many stupid arguments that are coming up as a result.

        1. I dont agree, my risk assessments at work prior to the HRA and post HRA were all about ensuring that any interference with a persons life, liberty etc were proportionate, necessary and reasonable. That did not change. Its common sense. Its application of the ECHR and the UNCHR. The HRA just brought the issue to the fore and some people took advantage in the same way as the Health and Safety Act should be common sense but some people (who are supposedly experts for their own companies) take extreme views about interpretation that are not within the spirit of the act.
          These are facts not a political opinion.

    3. It is the coalition government doing this and the LibDems clearly have had an influence on the Conservative government in bringing forward honest and fair policies which impact on LGBT communities in the UK and globally. That said, it is a Conservative Prime Minister, Foreign Secretary, International Development Secretary and Cabinet minister with responsibility for equality that are bringing in these changes. Other than Featherstone in her role as equality minister in the Home Office or Clegg when talking about bill of rights – where have the other LibDem ministerial team been when introducing LGBT issues – can’t recall anything dynamic …

  42. Maybe I’m just cynical, but I see this as an easy way for the government to cut the international aid budget “for the right reasons”. These African countries are not going to change their attitudes towards us any time soon and the government knows it.

    1. They did stop the kill the gays bill with these threats, along with threats from other countries.

  43. Why make a token gesture like this? Foreign aid should be axed, period, not used as bait to garner our votes.

  44. Father Ted 11 Oct 2011, 1:03am

    This American article is more informative. And why are we giving £70 million to Zimbabwe?

    http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2011/10/10/37758

  45. Can we sever all diplomatic links with the Vatican as well plz thx?

  46. Mary Flying Eagle 11 Oct 2011, 8:01am

    Someone, at last, seems to be showing wisdom, far beyond what some people will understand. Cut their funding,(completely) then perhaps,Lesbians/Gays,who live in darkness, fear, bigotry and hate,will at last, be allowed to live their lives free, as the beautiful souls they are.

  47. Pink News Think You're An Idiot 11 Oct 2011, 11:02am

    The Daily Mail invented this “story”.

    Why didn’t Pink News bother to check it?

    Shameful.

    The truth…

    http://www.fagburn.com/2011/10/daily-mail-telling-lies-for-living-part.html

    1. Thanks for the link thats a great site

    2. Not sure about the accuracy of either the Mails or fagburns article …

      What I am sure about is the UK government have previously specifically mentioned LGBT rights within the human rights requirements for aid

      AND

      we are not alone in making such promises

      http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/apr/20/anti-gay-laws-africa-uganda-ssempa

  48. Being gay/Lesbian/Bisexual had been cursed by all religious. God may not prevent natural disasters, everything is subject to the fall of humanity into ‘sinful that effects on everythings’ for ex: disasters, disease, resources limited, crisis & suffering as universe by against the laws of nature (Genesis 1:1). Revenge of God, Kingdom of Heavens & Mother of the Earth is ‘JUST STARTING’ God killed millions in the bible…..allowed almost every loss possible on this earth for ex: Job, Status, Sick, Deep grief, AIDS/HIV, Horrible, Loneliness, A Catastrophe Ballet. Let’s Keep praying and let’s see how that goes…Hurting was to realize what’s coming. ‘Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God’ (by the name of Jesus Christ, Amen!!)

    1. Interestingly you call yourself Shiva !

  49. So this story is actually untrue?
    I wonder how many others on Pink News are?

    1. Pink news seems to be more about the number of hits for revenue before reporting integrity. They filled a niche badly and have no serious competition.

    2. I dont think the story is untrue – just not new …

      Funding to Malawi has been reduced – fact

      Malawi was censored by UK govt for its LGBT rights standards – fact

      Uganda and Ghana have had threats made to have aid reduced linked to LGBT rights issues – fact

      Other countries such as Kenya have had diplomatic pressure place on them linked to LGBT rights – fact

      Are these new issues – probably not …

      Does that mean they shouldnt be reported – no, people have a right to know and it is of interest

      Is it right to take a Mail article as both current and factual without reasonable checking (if this is what has happened) – no

      Does it make this story invalid on PN – no

  50. very good at long last
    pay as you deserve
    hateful regimes can starve

  51. I am a Ghanaian and do not think we need aid from a country like the UK. How would you guys feel if we tried to impose some cultures of ours on you? However, you feel that we should always accept anything you approve off. Put sanctions first on the countries in the Middle East which discriminate against women. You cannot do that because you need oil to run your country. Selfishness at its peak. We will continue to resist oppressors rule to engage in filthy and unnatural things like same sex marriages. We will work hard to continue to be less dependent on other poor countries like UK. If you want to get balanced views, and not the one-sided gay comments here, please go to the link: http://ghanaweb.com/GhanaHomePage/NewsArchive/artikel.php?ID=221347&comment=0#com

    1. Sister Mary Clarence 11 Oct 2011, 8:04pm

      Ghana, like half of Africa was more than happy to accept an insipid and intolerant version of Christianity and the hatred it brought with it in the 1930s, and now a total lack of education prevents its peoples looking back and realising their are no grounds, no reason, for Africans to turn on their own people.

      There is nothing unnatural or filthy about homosexuality, and you might want to try using the internet to educate yourself on the equal place that gay people used to have in our societies, before our recent ancestors were tricked into believing the lies of the hateful missionary hordes that invaded our lands and sowed seeds of intolerance.

      Many Africans don’t have access to the knowledge base you have at your fingertips. Research the issue, and discovery how you have been lied to your entire life. It would be nice to thing that Africans has come of age a bit and could think for themselves rather than be spoon fed rubbish from elsewhere

    2. Given that in 2009-10 the UK provided over £90m of aid to Ghana which would have paid for the construction and maintenance of 5 brand new large hospitals in Ghana (given amounts recently quoted as having been spent from aid from other nations such as China and the US). So, far from being able to cope without UK assistance its clear that Ghana has been dependent on UK and other nations aid for some time. Given the large amount of public money provided to support Ghana it is not unreasonable that the UK can expect Ghana to respect human rights and withhold that aid if Ghana faills to demonstrate its commitment to universal human rights. Its not about indoctination (although certain US religious groups would like to indoctrinate Ghana and other African nations), its about human rights and respect. As for Middle Eastern nations, we do not give aid to the likes of Bahrain, Saudi Arabia etc etc … so the same tool to support human rights in those nations is not available to the UK govt

  52. Derek Williams 12 Oct 2011, 1:45pm

    I know there are strong arguments adduced against it in terms of further impoverishing an already stricken population, and the risk of further scapegoating of LGBT but they’re getting this anyway. If they don’t want their aid cut, they know what they have to do. The choice is theirs, not ours. I won’t put my hand in my pocket to aid them until they eradicate anti-LGBT discrimination.

  53. I like attempts to encourage other countries to improve their LGBT rights record, but this is unfair. The dramatic cut in aid will not hurt the politicians who are persecuting gay people – it will hurt the children and mothers and poorest who receive the aid. How many children are not going to be vaccinated and die because of this? Letting the vulnerable die and become diseased en masse in an attempt which probably won’t change the government’s mind is not moral.

  54. I wonder if they will be cutting aid to places like the kongos will have there aid cut, after all they have terrible human rights records …… but they do sell all there land off to the west so they probably won’t.

    1. Sorry that should say Congos, and it should be their.

  55. you have to be kidding guys! put your own thoughts aside about these countries and think anout this: THERE GOING TO PERSECUTE THEM EVEN MORE TO MAKE A POINT! look at the Uganda anit-homosexuality bill!

    Just to make it worse we shall starve the poor now too! What a country we have! We can’t ask people to catch up with our country and our views, i agree the violence has to stop but Cameron just screwed up royally and made it worse.

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all