Should the government increase or decrease foreign aid spending?

Increase for very poor countries including those poor countries suffering natural disasters. Monitor situations carefully-e.g., why give to India which, overall, is rich enough to have advanced technological projects in some areas?

Aid should be humanitarian in nature and in the form of goods delivered direct to those who need it, not cash to corrupt governments and agencies who redirect it for their own purposes.

Government need to sort out poverty in the uk

Maintain at current levels with remove conditionality that introduces austerity to already impoverished countries. Also remove ability for U.K. to influence government administrations in foreign countries as part of aid packages.

Once again depends on the situation within the country and their stance on human rights and if they are a country who has regularly allowed terrorism or has used funding too help promote terrorism. Would be dependent in my opinion on the situation.

Decrease, foreign aid helps nobody. It aids corrupted governments in siphoning money for own use, doesn't reach investors.

Keep as is, but do NOT give to countries: with human rights violations, harbouring or promoting terrorists or which are kleptocracies.

Maintain, but do more scrutiny to make sure aid gets to the people who need it rather than corrupt individuals/groups.

That money would be far better spent investing in critical infrastructure in the recipient countries rather than keeping them in a state of perpetual dependency

Stop giving aid to countries who don’t need or deserve it, e.g. countries who have their own space programmes or support terrorism

Decrease, in most instances we should be working to solve our own problems which the extra money could go towards

The UK should provide aid where needed whilst ensuring the UK citizens have a standard of living as living standards have significantly fallen with children and vulnerable people in precarious living situations.

Not decreased, but countries like India that have things like their own space programs or nuclear weapons should not receive foreign aid. Foreign aid should be for the poorest countries for the benefit of their people.

Decrease, because I think it is more important to focus on our own country's problems first and we should deny aid to countries that harbour or promote terrorism.

Decrease spending, stop giving aid to countries that don't need it and exercise more control how the aid is used.

I don't trust the UK government to not provide funding for dismantling regimes that don't serve. I.e what's happened in the middle east for the past 100 years

The government should decrease the support of countries that are bombing other countries, that require foreign aid.

Dependant upon agreement of which countries are getting the support & there are not questions over their actions.

Current level should be adequate, but stop diverting it to be spent on services provided to programmes in the UK

Foreign aid should be provided for disasters, controls should be in place to avoid corruption in use of these funds.

Increase to previous levels but dent aid to countries that harbour terrorises and also increase accountability for those programme and countries that do receive aid to make sure it gets to those who need it.

Decrease until we drastically reduce and fix our national budget deficit because we can't afford it, Britain first. Never give aid to countries that harbour and promote terrorism or those that are actively our enemies.

Keep the same, but cease payments to countries such as India who are themselves increasingly wealthy.

Increase but ensure this is for investment and measure outcomes. No funding for corrupt officials and cancel debt.

I am satisfied with the current amount of spending Increase, but only for countries that have no human rights violations

Iits hard to say whether we should increase or decrease as there things that happen that cannot be forseen. I think we should help wherever we can but it must be made sure aid goes to the people who need it the most

Raise or lower, dependent on track record for spending efficiency of recipients. Foreign aid should demand statistics on where the money is being spent / applied.

Foreign aid should be replaced with foreign investment. It should not be provided to countries that harbour or promote terrorism or those with human rights violations.

The government should work with other countries to rapidly address climate change and to address economic models that mean that countries are continually destabilised in the battle for resource, which simply creates poverty, chaos and the refugee crisis

Increase, but for countries that have no human rights violations, as well as Palestine, Syria, Yemen, Lebanon, Afghanistan, Sudan, Nigeria, Somalia, Brazil, Venezuela, Peru, Ecuador, and Bolivia

They should minimise, this country seems to be running dry of money quickly which is not only due to foreign aid, however that is a healthy portion of money that be spent in areas that improve our country, such as the NHS to hire nursing staff who actually care about their patients, along with a higher wage, also to developing more sporting programmes.

I heard that “Foreign aid” money often gets spent on neoliberal pro-corporate projects in developing countries, not at all resembling actual “aid”

Decreased by removing funding from any countries with ties to genocide or human right violations. Including the investigation of such.

Maintain, but transfer aid from countries with nuclear weapons programmes or space programmes, such as Pakistan or India to countries that may be affected by poverty or climate change

Increase or keep the same amount as it is but use only for emergency and disaster aid rather than trying to boost other economies.

Foreign aid needs to be decided on a case by case basis, depending on the needs of the country in question. It is not a simple answer, but decisions should be more transparent and decided by independent panels with foreign office oversight

I am satisfied with the current amount of spending, but in cases when emergencies happen (like the Syria-Turkey earthquake), we should increase our spending.

Decrease direct spending but shift current spending to loans to SMBs based in the countries in question

Maintain but only to to support countries with societal and economic issues insurmountable without support not finding countries with larger GDPs

Decrease, and only provide foreign aid for non warmongering means, in addition to diverting funds into health, education, and welfare in the UK

Stick with the current amount of spending but decrease or stop the amount for countries with human rights violations.

Increase, but also reform the system so that it actually gets to those in need and not into the bank accounts of corrupt governments.

Increase, but the money should be spent aiding the public in foreign countries as opposed to the military, and I do also believe that the government should also take firmer stances on human rights violations.

We should use aid to get countries on side and influence their policies, for example cut aid to Uganda until they repeal the death penalty for gay people

END IT

Unless you're getting something in return too many nations take advantage of aid and it's now become a way to launder money

gov takes out fed loan gives money to other nation who gives it back to shell companies owned by the very gov that took the loan out.

who fits the tab?

Decrease, and stop giving aid to countries that spend their own money on frivolous endeavours, such as space programs.

Although we should priorities our national spending and economic climate, we should give foreign aid based on a case-by-case basis

Increase the spending but actually make sure it is helping that country be rebuilt to reduce immigration here

Decrease and only give to countries that need it. ie not india that sent a rocket to the moon, when can afford to do that ourselves.

Decrease, unless we are directly involved. And deny aid to countries that violate human rights or promote terrorism

Decrease drastically until we have reduced and improved our National budget deficit and once that is complete do not provide aid to countries which promote or facilitate terrorism

Has there been any analysis into what would happen if we stopped, or if all the more advanced countries stopped collectively? And everyone look after their own. With emergency aid due to natural disaster like floods, earthquakes tsunami, fires, still being supported

Increase, but only when the cost of living crisis has been neutralised. Additionally, the UK shouldn’t provide any supplies to countries openly against British Values except for humanitarian efforts/civilian aid

Maintain current levels until we drastically reduce our deficit, but deliver aid directly wherever there is any risk of funds being used for other things.

Any change to foreign aid should be on redistribution of the wealth this country stole within colonialism

Give what is needed directly to the organisations that are in need. Human rights violations are government driven, not people driven.

Neither increase nor decrease however there should not be funds sent to countries that have human rights violations.

Increase for countries going through humanitarian crises and decrease for foreign military spending.

I am satisfied with the current amount of spending, however funds should only be directed to countries with legitimate need

Decrease and redistribute the funds into our own social programs to ensure the welfare of our own people.

Yes, if the aid goes directly to the people not the governments, with some nations this is difficult to do.

Increase, for actual worthwhile causes, such as support for Palestine and within scope of national budgets where money could actually go to domestic causes.

Not exactly sure on the full extent of positive and negative but to me it seems the UK has a lot of issues that need fixing itself, the severity being in my opinion quite high

I do think the rich should give more money, but it should be their responsibility, not the government's. Give what you can, not what is required.

Stop aid to China & India - & comparable places. Stop forcing recipients to spend it on our products, That's not aid, it's a subsidy to our industries.

Maintain current level, use the budget to support illegal migrants and tailor the aid to serve UK National interests.

Maintain the current level but reduce or deny aid to countries where terrorism is promoted or can afford a space programme

Increase, but we should allocate more funding for countries that have no human rights violations and not deny, but place sanctions on officials in countries that harbour or promote terrorism.

Decrease to 0.5 of GDP and deny aid to countries that promote terrorism or are non democratically governed like Afghanistan a state run by militant jihads

Decrease many countries like India ,who we spend taxpayer money on, divert our aid funding into sending rockets into space

Decrease, and refocus remaining foreign aid to projects with better return on investment

Decrease foreign aid is a waste of money especially to autocratic regimes

Decrease and don’t give to countries that have their own space program

Too nuanced to answer in a simple question

Support private foreign aid initiatives that go directly to helping people and promoting democratic and liberal values, rather than giving money to corrupt, authoritarian and self serving regimes.

Increase but make sure not to corrupt governments and make sure it’s on the ground

Increase, once the defeceit is reduced

Potentially increase to state groups for human and overall rights to equally distribute to people under their authority, otherwise on developed countries with good human and overall rights, status quo.

increase but on a quid pro quo basis meaning that we receive greater commercial and diplomatic access.

I’m all for giving money to those most in need, however, I seriously question any decision by any government to send aid to people who very loudly support the murder and destruction of the people in their own countries let alone in for example the UK as we have seen with Hamas

Should no longer be fixed as a percentage of GDP - should also be required to be spent on projects which further the UK's foreign policy goals - the UK can't help the whole world, therefore support should be targeted towards projects which provide most benefit to UK.

Foreign aid spending is fine. They're really just bribes and benefit our country a lot internationally

We should increase funding to countries that Britain directly impacted the development of, e.g. India

Decrease current spending proportionate to other nations as it is important to be a force for good and stand up for our allies. However withdraw spending from nations that promote terrorism or violate human rights

The current model of aid distribution is counter productive in recipient countries. Needs to be a ground up approach

Be more targeted in spending, to ensure it goes to countries in genuine need, not countries that are spending their income on luxury endeavours such as space programmes.

We need to provide aid on the condition we know how its being spent, corruption is rife and the aid is not going where it needs to.

I don't think the answer is as simple as it sounds and would require more informed information before I decide

Decrease, particularly to countries who promote/harbour terrorists or have a high percentage of illegal/scamming/criminal activity which impacts on our security and safety

Foreign aid spending should be spent responsibly, used for emergency responses, and should not be based on a quota. Unspent money from a yearly budget should be returned to public spending.

Maintain, but redistribute away from countries with human rights violations towards nations with better records

During COVID government foreign aid to countries was made smaller. I believe the UK should come first. However, at the same time the UK should be providing some aid to those nations who do are in dire need. Giving aid to nations such as Pakistan, India, and China is completely wrong. Also, we should not be giving aid to those nations who want to "destroy" the West.

Increase for all countries that were previously part of the "British Empire" and have no human rights violations.
Maintain for all other countries that have no human rights violations & negotiate with former "British Empire" countries who do break human rights conventions

Foreign aid spending is overall critical to Britain's interests. However, it should be done more selectively to ensure the aid is going to the correct places and not being used to fund corruption.

Increase but with restrictions based on foreign governments humans rights records. However give more to support NGOs responding to disaster relief etc

Decrease until we reduce our national budget deficit, plus stop investing in countries with bad human rights records.

Separate foreign aid spending from the cost of illegal immigrant processing and then match foreign aid spending to the average per-gdp spending of other countries, be that an increase or decrease

Increase, but only in a way that would provide investment into the foreign country, which would eventually generate profit for us, like the Public Investment Fund

Look at what we pay compare with other countries, potentily look how it is distruibuted and potentialy decrease it to then help solve our own hom,eless or less fortunate as well as helping others.