Why Should We Continue to Send Aid to India?

Indian Government Spending and Aid contribution figures have been blown sky high.

The launch of an Indian Mars Mission is a giant leap for mankind. It marks another step in a global space age, once the reserve of the US and Soviet Russia.

Not only does it stand as a statement of India intent, but it demonstrates that here is a country slowly building its way out of great economic deprivation.

However, it is slowly. Public perception of India’s Mars Mission has been largely confused, with many claiming it to be a demonstration of wealth from the country. The evidence shows that the country is taking off quite literally and so aid contributions are no longer needed, many have suggested.

In reality this is a gross miscalculation that confuses the difference between growth and wealth in the Indian subcontinent.

Since the 1990s, the area has experienced its greatest period of growth in the country’s history, with many companies tapping into the wealth of resources that India can offer. Whilst it has helped to bring many millions out of poverty, there has not been a significant reduction in the percentage of people who live below the line. Around 40% of children are malnourished, and adults fare little better. The country is still renowned for its slums, with more than 500 million Indians living without electricity.

Here is a tale of two cities, twoIndias.

The growth of skilled labourers, scientists, doctors and other professionals is redefining the landscape of India. The space missions are far from a new project: they date back to the 70s. In fact, China’s space missions are more recent than India’s. Therefore, the willingness to invest in these enterprises shows a keen dedication from the Indian government not to be backfooted once again. Here is a nation that was forced into submission by British and French forces, which made the lands part of their empire and irrevocably damaged development there.

Never again says the space mission.

This is not a declaration that India does not need aid. India still remains home to the world’s largest poor. After all, aid is about poor people and not poor countries.

In Uganda, for example, aid packages from the UK are now not being sent to the government, but instead to agencies that will ensure the people will benefit from the money sent to the country. A similar review of expenditure in India should be brought forward, especially since there have been previous examples of India declaring that they do not need British aid.

Whilst this is a gross underestimation on the part of a country still in need of sufficient sanitation measures for a vast percentage of its population, the space missions do mark a step in the right direction.

Withdrawing from India at this stage would not be right; it would be a fiscal rerun of independence. The support from Britain ensures that India can now be seen not as an economically undeveloped country, but somewhere for companies to invest. Indeed, Pepsi Cola have recently announced a larger investment into the country’s infrastructure.

Aid merely needs readjustment: instead of packages, India now needs business legitimacy amidst its Asian rivals. The space mission is merely a manifestation of this Indian capacity. Providing these economic opportunities will ensure a strengthened British-Indian relationship, profits for both countries, and slowly reduce Indian dependence on aid.

India’s space revolution ushers in a new era of economic strength that needs commercial and corporate support if it is to transform and reform India as the international player that the country craves to be, surrounded by Arabian prominence and China’s technical drive. Acknowledging the injustice of colonial expansion, and supporting the Commonwealth evolution from a business table will launch the country to the stratosphere without much more help.

The Value of Work Experience

Originally written for The Guardian Comment is Free.

Another busy week is ending at The Guardian. A busy week which I've experienced first hand, taking up a placement opportunity at the newspaper. I've covered activist Malala, sleuthed James Bond's espionage hot spots, and been deluged with storm waves following Sandy on the live blog. But I'm not about to walk up to the news desk and demand a pay cheque for the week. When I leave the office this afternoon there will be no cash in hand for my hard work, but experience, the value of which is immeasurably greater.

Experience is a compulsory element of the graduate CV, even on a tight budget. Gone are the days when fresh faced University leavers could walk into an office with a smattering of A Levels and a role of paper from a Red Brick institute: education is no longer indicative of employment.

In the wake of the indiscretions of Blair's office, my friends and I soon found ourselves discussing the inevitability of unpaid experience as the only means by which to further our career prospects in a stormy recession. Rising youth unemployment and an increase in degree holders makes it almost impossible for companies to commit to contracts and long term employment without some proof of previous relevant work.

The almost universal problem in accessing this experience though transcends from the fact that a large proportion of the most established and reputable internships will be placed in London. I, like many of my friends, do not live in the capital. (Un)surprisingly, London just so happens to be expensive and out of many budgets. This fact severely limits and disables the options of many undergraduates searching for that big break. Yet talking with a friend who just started an internship in London last month, she said that “there was no alternative” to coming to the city, “no matter the cost”.

According to Intern Aware, not only are the majority of placements in London, where the cost of living is the highest in the UK, but The IPPR estimated in 2010 that there were around 100,000 unpaid internships in the UK. Of course, the problem is that unpaid internships are corrosive to social mobility and opportunity in a number of circumstances. If you cannot afford to support yourself for the period of the placement (fortunately for myself, this was achieved cheaply by bribing my aunt with some chocolate and leaving her a bottle of wine this morning), then there is little chance of substantial opportunity to further your horizons. Perhaps one placement is justifiable, but two or three consecutive stints of unpaid work leave students add a gaping hole to their already spiralling debt.

However, for my part, work experience is something that every student needs to acquire, regardless of wage. This is probably a divisive and contentious view, but let's be clear, I'm not one of these stereotyped students that can ring up mummy and daddy and ask for some money to be transferred so as I can enjoy London. My parents can't afford that additional expense, and frankly, nor do I expect to put that burden upon them. The student loan is also not the endless pot of Irish gold it appears to be in Freshers Week.

Yet, work experience and internships completed for free say a great deal more about the competency and dedication of the young employee. In a climate where companies continually bemoan the problem of telling applicants apart, those who have volunteered themselves to complete placements with minimal monetary support display a vivacity so essential to the work place (especially in the media).

Companies provide these placements to people entirely untrained, with little experience. Despite the brevity of the work, paid staff will have to take time out of their schedule to train, advise, guide the intern and is probably under constant supervision. Not to be condescending, but it's hardly realistic to expect to walk into The Guardian and land the front page whilst on placement.

Just as you pay for the service of university, work experience is something you pay for by making sacrifices of sorts. It's a privilege, not a right. Not that this statement should detract or act as an exoneration of Tony Blair's office. It's just, from the student outrage, you'd be forgiven for thinking this was a new problem.

Working for free is inherently integrated into the system of employment. I've covered some big issues this week for The Guardian: do I feel exploited? No: I feel privileged to be given this opportunity, to have some world renowned and respected journalists that lead their field have faith in me to turn out a piece suitable for publication.

Rewriting my CV this weekend, I'll be able to send out my portfolio with a massive boost to my prospective employers. For a short term inconvenience now, I stand to benefit enormously in the future. No one had really questioned this practice until now.

Perhaps a system in which work placements offer means-tested assistance, in a similar way to the student finance service, would proffer a much more accessible work place and encourage a larger number of students who believe their backgrounds hinder their progress to look into experience. I've hardly had to pay for anything this week, but it would be nice to go up to the news desk editor, bung a load of Oyster card receipts in his hand and get £30 back. For a student, that's a two-week food shop. My train fare would feed me until New Year's.

Unpaid internships may present themselves as social engineering in another format because of their obvious limitations, but they are social characterising. Hand in hand with the experience comes invaluable training and character building by observing the tough post-university world through a different, direct lens.

The comments of my friend in a London bar earlier this week strike a chord: “no alternative, no matter the cost.” If we expect employers to take young new employees seriously, we should first demonstrate our dedication to our crafts. The school of “something for nothing” is no longer a sustainable attitude for any graduate.