Hi,

It's an interesting idea that as impressive as Live 8 was, the actual purpose might not have happened. I'm pretty sure there is a load of people that don't even know what Make Poverty History is trying to do, except for the ultimate aim found convieniently in its name. And the question that needs addressing is why this is. A lot, I'm guessing, is because people haven't taken to time to ask, or check out a website, or do anything useful like that. But if the aim of the concerts was to raise awareness, then maybe the things that we actually want the G8 to do should be rammed down everyones throat a lot more than it is. And when was the last time a tabloid newspaper wrote anything on conditional aid, or the hypocrisy of trading practices or gave actual figures on the debt? In the meantime, most of the newspapers give a run down about which musicians actually performed, with a rating of there performance, which I can't help feeling completely misses the point.

The lack of understanding is completely apparent on our local news feedback section, where people were asked for their opinion. "Live 8 was a complete waste of money". Well, you're a cretin. Money spent by people looking to go. Money covers cost of concert. Where is the waste? "Aid will never work in Africa unless they get rid of corruption". The whole point is that this time, there is no aid. The slates are to be wiped clean, because the only people that suffer from debt, even in corrupt countries, are the ones who are at the bottom. In future, aid and loans should be conditional on this corruption, because money or its absence is the only thing a corrupt government understand. And thats the only condition for money. These are the things the campaign is all about, so how they come up as a criticism of it is beyond me.

And then, my personal favourite. "Giving unconditional aid to Africa won't give the leaders any incentive to spend it properly". Because all African government are corrupt, right? No-one wants to help their own people. It strikes me that if a government was allowed to do what it wanted, then for the most part, that would probably benefit the people of the country first. And wouldn't that be a novel thing, rather than benefiting ourselves.

Speak soon,

Craig (probably preaching to the choir, but feeling better for it)