Labour and overseas aid

It is not the first time the words "astonishingly callous" have been used to describe an action taken by this Tory government, but they are particularly apt when reporting its abandonment of the pledge to "spend 0.7% of GDP on aid" (Breaking our pledge on aid spending doesn`t make Britain shrewd - just small, 30/11/20). The decision becomes especially galling when it`s considered alongside the stated reason for doing so, that "Britain could not afford it" (Cutting overseas aid in the name of fiscal prudence is nonsense, 30/11/20)! As Larry Elliott tells us, retaining the 0.7% level would cost the Treasury "an additional £3bn to £4bn" a year, at a time when the cost of servicing the debt has fallen exponentially, and when the Bank of England`s quantitative easing programme has delivered over £800bn since 2009, taking up a third of the national debt, with the bonus of no urgent requirement to pay it back. Tories are playing a very dangerous game if they think of the British electorate as raving Faragists, and with Labour in need of at least some semblance of unity, decisive action by Starmer on this issue would be sensible. As support for Johnson`s three-tier system is apparently "not unconditional", isn`t this a great opportunity for Starmer to gain the moral high ground, especially if he used some of Andrew Mitchell`s "likely impacts" in his argument (Johnson seeks to mollify rebels before Commons vote on tiers, 30/11/20)?