I agree with the basic sentiment - that it is ludicrous that we are providing millions, if not billions, to countries such as India and Pakistan - both countries that choose to spend a great deal of their own GDP on Defence, Space Programmes and other high maintenance, high profile schemes designed more to enhance the pride of the leaders of the countries involved.
When we talk about Aid money, it should be sent to people who are genuinely in need, countries that genuinely need help.
Thing is, our Aid budget is linked very closely with the political and commercial aims of the UK, as Tony has alluded to. I was listening to a radio interview with an ex- senior civil servant who had worked for many years within the Overseas Development / Aid department. He was suggesting that we only committed funds to programmes that would benefit the UK commercial interests and gave as an example a hospital building programme within India - conditional upon acceptance of the money was that India would buy exclusively from British suppliers when constructing and furnishing the hospitals, and that for every billion we spent in such Aid programmes, the UK got 2 billion back. Not sure if that is right or not, but I can only imagine that the UK is expecting some political or commercial benefit from providing the money.......