Role
Over its history the department for international development and its predecessors have been independent departments or part of the foreign office. In 1997 Labour separated the Department for International Development from the Foreign Office. They also reduced the amount of aid tied to purchasing British goods and services which often led to aid being spent ineffectually.
Along with the Nordic countries DFID has generally avoided setting up its own programs as that can create unnecessary bureaucracy. To achieve this DFID distributes most of its money to governments and other international organisations that have already developed suitable programmes and lets them distribute the money as efficiently as possible.
| In Cabinet | Outside Cabinet | |
|---|---|---|
| Separate Government Department | 1964-67 1997–present |
1961-64 1967-70 1974-75 |
| Answerable to the FCO | 1975-76 | 1970-74 1977-79 1979-97 |
In 2010 DFID were criticised for spending around £15 million a year in the UK, although this only accounts for 0.25% of their total budget. £1.85 million was given to the Foreign Office to fund the Papal visit of Pope Benedict in September 2010, although a department spokesman said that "The contribution recognised the Catholic Church's role as a major provider of health and education services in developing countries". There has also been criticism of some spending by international organisations with UNESCO and the FAO being particularly weak. The government were also criticised for increasing the aid budget at a time where other departments were being cut. The head of the conservative pressure group Taxpayers Alliance said that "The department should at least get the same treatment other high priority areas like science did – a cash freeze would save billions.".
Read more about this topic: Department For International Development
Famous quotes containing the word role:
“The traditional American husband and father had the responsibilities—and the privileges—of playing the role of primary provider. Sharing that role is not easy. To yield exclusive access to the role is to surrender some of the potential for fulfilling the hero fantasy—a fantasy that appeals to us all. The loss is far from trivial.”
—Faye J. Crosby (20th century)
“In today’s world parents find themselves at the mercy of a society which imposes pressures and priorities that allow neither time nor place for meaningful activities and relations between children and adults, which downgrade the role of parents and the functions of parenthood, and which prevent the parent from doing things he wants to do as a guide, friend, and companion to his children.”
—Urie Bronfenbrenner (b. 1917)
“This [new] period of parenting is an intense one. Never will we know such responsibility, such productive and hard work, such potential for isolation in the caretaking role and such intimacy and close involvement in the growth and development of another human being.”
—Joan Sheingold Ditzion and Dennie Palmer (20th century)