Published:

In the end-May survey I split the sample three ways and asked three different questions. The results prove again that the more specific the description of the development budget’s benefits the more support those benefits can get (even among hard-headed Tory voters!):

3Qs

By the way: In today’s Washington Post Mike Gerson presents David Cameron as a model for American Republicans – combining fiscal responsibility with a concern flor the world’s most vulnerable people. Reading it made me proud to be a British Conservative. International Development Secretary Andrew Mitchell is quoted in the piece and gives a very retail defence of aid policy:

“This month, Cameron and Bill Gates will host a conference in London to encourage contributions to GAVI — the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization. Britain will expand its commitment, and the country’s development secretary, Andrew Mitchell, has been twisting arms to persuade other governments to do the same. The increase that Cameron and Gates propose would vaccinate about 250 million children over the next four years, saving at least 4 million lives. When I caught up with Mitchell by phone, he was visiting a GAVI immunization center outside Islamabad, Pakistan. “For the price of a Starbucks cup of coffee,” he said, “you can vaccinate nine kids. It is absolutely awesome.” Asked about opposition to foreign assistance increases while other spending is cut, he echoes words used by Cameron: “We’re not going to balance the books on the backs of the poorest people in the world. Charity begins at home, but it does not end there.””

Comments are closed.