Watch Talking Point Audio-only version

Following a poor international response to the South Asian earthquake appeal, the UN has renewed its request for more money from rich nations.

Secretary General Kofi Annan acknowledged that there is aid donation 'fatigue' following the tsunami, hurricane Katrina and the flooding disaster in central America. But he warned that without further pledges, aid will not reach those affected before winter.

Should international aid come from a single fund? Or should countries retain control of the amounts they give? Does media coverage affect the amounts donated?

This debate is now closed. Read a selection of your comments below.

The following comments reflect the balance of opinion we have received so far:

This is a difficult question. But in the case of Pakistan, where this unimaginable disaster has caused unbearable suffering, the country should be given debt relief immediately, particularly as the international community is unwilling to provide emergency aid. How can Governments and lenders still ask for billions of dollars in interest payments from Pakistan at this time?
Ali, UK

I think the Americans have a good setup - they have a disaster fund which basically acts as a pot of money that caters for areas regularly 'wiped out' by natural disasters/storms. A similar fund could be set up by the UN/World Bank/IMF, with regular contributions from oil tax or something similar, that could cater for the world.
Mitch, Northwich, UK

A global fund managed by UN would only consume taxpayers' money without producing any results. Those interested in seeing disasters responded to more effectively should lobby their governments to make their contributions to the UN dependent on the UN becoming a more streamlined and leaner organisation. Without such reform I would prefer my money went to NGOs who do the work that the UN does but at a fraction of the cost.
Shabel, Birmingham, UK

The UN should be a central repository for aid funds collected and distribute and fund a multinational response team. This operation would mirror peacekeeping activities but be for disasters. And it must be a cost effective and efficient force.
Virginia Davis, Portland, Oregon, USA

I feel we should set up a central fund of some kind that is built up gradually for use. I'm tired of all the appeals and feeling I have to give money all the time.
Anon, UK

I think a fund would be a more convenient idea in addition to the any donations from the individual government. This would mean that in any humanitarian crisis old enemies would not hold back help and a neutral body can offer instant help. I'm also disgusted at the low level of newspaper media coverage in the UK.
Ramzan Khan, Luton, UK

Well said Bruce Acton, Andy (UK) and others. If you want a good model look at the insurance industry. Governments should pay premiums based on population size, GDP and world risks, and not on political negotiations. The UN should both administer the fund and strongly promote policies of world risk reduction. Risk reduction includes: warning systems, building standards, locust control, local foreseeable problem contingency planning and much more. Risk reduction reduces total suffering and expenditure on disasters. Prompt fast coordinated action reduces total suffering and expenditure on disasters. Fair and universal premiums get rid of a humiliating and sometimes false division between "The donor community" and the "Poor nations". Also fair premiums take the politics out of human disasters. It may be that this is a chance for the UN to shine. Going round with a posh begging bowl a couple of weeks after a disaster has not been shown to be very effective.
Chris Smith, Riga, Latvia

I am very surprised by the way some Asian and Middle East nations have reacted to this catastrophe. These nations were expected to provide more support. To make the matter worse India and Pakistan itself are making this a political issue.
Suraj Chhetri, Kathmandu, Nepal

I don't think the idea of a single universal fund is really practical because the reason people give money in charity may differ, as for dealing with a calamity of this magnitude I wonder if we ever can be prepared! But yes, definitely a system for swift collection of funds should be like a network. As for retaining control then to be honest I think they should be given detail so as where there fund was spent to curb fraud though lengthy procedures should not be involved at all since that hampers the relief effort.

It's through media that people actually witness what gross implications of the disaster in Pakistan. The singer Fakhr-e-Alam was the first one who appeared on TV and now has a whole unit called United Pakistan at Islamabad where the whole of Pakistan is gathered so he gave a platform to the youth so media coverage does indeed help in making people realize how they can save a life!
Asma Ahmad, Lahore, Pakistan

How about a global tax on weapons production? Garsett Larosse, Malle, Belgium

How about a global tax on weapons production? And incentives for weapons manufacturers to reconvert to development tools and infrastructure. Governments should also continue to reform their armies with fast relief and reconstruction divisions. They should agree between them who specializes in what, depending on their own needs.
Garsett Larosse, Malle, Belgium

Number of disasters happening now-a-days are many than in earlier years. This may be due green-house effect and pollution. But we should not be afraid of managing such disasters. I personally feel as a salaried person that if every country collects a very little amount from their salaried people directly from their pay-slip and donate the same to a UN monitored Disaster-Management-Fund it will be possible to manage any disaster in future. After all we are human beings and we have to come to the rescue to the affected people on humanitarian ground. We cannot get tired so easily.
P C Sarcar, Calcutta, India

As a British Asian, I am deeply hurt and disappointed that wealthy countries have not helped the victims of this tragedy. Britain spent centuries exploiting its colonies and became very rich from them. India was the jewel in the crown. Also, Asians generate millions in taxes from our hard work and our businesses - yet the UK gave a small amount and spends so much more on warfare. Please show us you actually care about us. We need help for the victims.
Adeel, Coventry

Most people I am sure, would like to be certain that whatever aid was given is used for the benefit of the poor souls affected, and not hijacked for political purposes. This is why contributions from the public are falling off. Money is not being used appropriately, or in some cases, even reaching the victims of disasters.
Ken Thompson, Paignton UK

How can we build bridges with people if we turn our backs on them at their greatest moment of need?
Gerry, Glasgow, Scotland

I think all the countries of the world give just two percent of there annual defence budget for natural disasters Sohail Aziz, Birmingham, UK

I think all the countries of the world give just two percent of there annual defence budget to a third party like United Nation for natural disasters. They should introduce and train specific amount of people from all the countries. If we reduce, even totally stop, developing weapons and utilise this money of the world in a proper way it help a lot. Now look at the develop countries, they are spending millions and millions on the reach over the moon, stars and other things which don't have a real effect over our lives. They are looking for water in moon, though even people don't have clean water to drink in this world. I don't know why it so. Why don't they fulfil all the requirements of the all the humans in here before thinking anything about the moon Mars or anything else?
Sohail Aziz, Birmingham, UK

Why not have all countries contribute monthly to an International Fund an amount based on their GNP. Then funds could be distributed from "the bank" to any country, as and when disaster strikes. It should be made clear that these funds would only be discharged to alleviate human suffering and would be rigidly controlled by an impartial international panel.
Alex W Greig, Sooke, BC, Canada

A somewhat discredited UN could redeem itself by co-ordinating the establishment of a global fund for the prevention and relief of human suffering. Contributions to the fund should be based on a formula relating to a nation's wealth and its remit should be as wide as possible, enabling it to act sooner and more comprehensively in cases such as the Niger famine.
Bruce Acton, Winchester, UK

I give money to charity, but that is my choice, not the government's Rob, London, UK

Should the government give any aid to other countries? If the British People wanted to donate money to charity, they would. There is nothing to stop them doing this. What right does the government have to take my taxes (upon pain of imprisonment) and give them away to other countries? I give money to charity, but that is my choice, not the government's.
Rob, London, UK

I found it pretty perplexing to note that the US, despite having the most affluent citizens in the world per capita, rank about 25th in the world in terms of the amount of aid donations given per capita. After the recent natural disasters on their own soil and the poverty and disease which follows, hopefully, through empathy, there will be a growth in compassionate giving from the US.
Paul Rushton, London, UK

It all depends on where the disaster happened and who is affected? Governments should not oblige its people to develop any responsibility beyond the immediate family.
Pucho Boedo, UK

Who will administer this fund? The people who administered the Food-for-Oil program? And how will the "contributions" be allocated? It appears to me that this is a way to redistribute funds from well-off cultures to less-well-off cultures without requiring the recipients to amend their building practices. A mud hut on a hill in an earthquake zone or flood zone is not something I wish to donate to rebuild.
Michael, California, USA

Media coverage has no effect on the amount a country is going to give Omorodion Osula, Boston, USA

While disaster aid is long overdue for reform, international aid shouldn't come from a single source. The magnitude of any disaster will determine the amount of aid that is needed. Individual countries will determine the amount of aid they will be able to give. Media coverage has no effect on the amount a country is going to give. Although it will to enlighten the public about the extent of damage but individual donors will determine what they are going to give.
Omorodion Osula, Boston, USA

Disaster aid should be handled by the UN. Each country should contribute an agreed amount to the fund (money, personnel or equipment). When a disaster occurs, the UN co-ordinates the rescue efforts. This way, relief is available immediately.
Andy, UK

Far too much state-donated aid is given for political reasons - to buy influence or promote the donor nation's interests. Governments who are serious about humanitarian aid should channel much more of it through independent organisations like the DEC. I trust them far more than any government to give aid where it is most appropriate.
Jon G, Huddersfield, UK

Seemingly we have more disasters than ever before in our history, so more and more money is necessary. I would introduce an international tax aimed to re-fill the UN Emergency Funds account. One percent from all around the globe could make a difference.
Mary McCannon, Budapest, Hungary

International aid should be reformed. Too much of it reflects the narrow interests of donor countries. Food aid is often little more than dumping unwanted food that was over-produced as a result of subsidies. Other countries give money as opportunistic ways of winning "hearts and minds" in strategically important places. Donors have a right to choose where their money is going. In addition to this, however, as Jan Egeland has argued, a standing pool of donor funds - a Central Emergency Response Fund - would allow aid agencies to get live-saving cash quickly and without political strings attached.
Josie, New York, USA