Why are international aid & health budgets ringfenced?

[Alex C.]

I really don't understand why health and international aid budgets are ringfenced. All it will result in is deeper cuts in other areas, like policing, education and transport.

 

There is definitely inefficiency in the public sector and the health budget could almost certainly be reduced without causing front line staffing issues if they took a deep, comprehensive review of where the money is flowing and cutting out any waste.

 

International aid is different in that you can't really cut out waste - but I can't see why this department cannot undertake a 4-5% cut (the same as forecast for other departments) in budget. We can make it up once we're out of the deficit. I understand that there's a certain level of compassion involved in the decision, but wouldn't it be better for us to get into a much better position in terms of the deficit, and not run the risk of slowing the recovery by cutting domestic budgets?

 

Is there anything I'm missing, or are these decisions taken simply as popularist measures?