Most International Aid Wasted, Say Agencies (US & Italy worst culprits)

[cthrumatrix]

Most International Aid Wasted, Say Agencies

Mon Feb 28, 8:49 AM ET World - Reuters


By Jeremy Lovell

LONDON (Reuters) - Red tape, inefficiency and nepotism mean that only one fifth of international aid actually gets to the people who need it, aid agencies said Monday.
snip

It accused the United States and Italy of being the worst culprits in so-called aid "round tripping," spending some 70 percent of their aid on their own companies.


"This is the ultimate form of round tripping -- taking with one hand what is given with the other while advertising your 'generosity,"' it said, noting that the inefficiency involved inflated procurement costs by some $7 billion a year.


snip

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20050228/wl_nm/britain_aid_dc

let' see $$$ wasted in Iraq....with Charity...everything seems like a scam with govt.

[Catchawave]

1. Reminds me of the Red Cross's 9-11 windfall

...going to remodeling their offices? To this day, they'll never see a red cent from me.

[MrPrax]

2. Out of all the agencies involved...

The best one was probably Doctors without Borders (mediciene de frontieres)...about two weeks into the disaster, they matter of factly told people to stop donating to them as they had received MORE than enough to carry out their relief plans...

Jeez they must be a class act, I had to check to see if Hell had frozen over as I would never have imagined an relief NGO ever refusing donations...
Nope hell didn't freeze over and they are a class act...

[Lone_Star_Dem]

4. Yes, they the definition of a class act. n/t

[denverbill]

3. Don't forget the Viagra.

All in the name of saving taxes.

In case you might have missed it, aid workers in the tsunami relief area have gotten all sorts of worthless crap that constituted 'aid', like crates of Viagara, winter clothing, old, worn out clothing that even refugees wouldn't want. And you can bet your ass that someone is writing it off their taxes and bragging about their generosity.

[Soloflecks]

5. Tsunami funds unaccounted

http://www.sundaytelegraph.news.com.au/story/0,9353,12337209-1702,00.html

Neill Wright, who headed the Sri Lankan emergency response for the United Nations refugee agency UNHCR, said today only part of the funds had been accounted for.

"Billions and billions and billions of dollars have already been poured into responding to the tsunami but only one part of it ... can be in any way accounted for at this stage," Mr Wright said.

"Nobody to the best of my knowledge, really has the faintest idea what's actually been given or what it's all going to do."

Mr Wright said large government donations could be tracked but funds raised by smaller, non-government organisations (NGOs) were not necessarily recorded.

Governments required proof of how their donations were spent but smaller NGOs did not have the capacity to be held to account, he said.

"They want to give all your money directly to people so they're saying, don't hold me accountable, just give me your money and I'll go and spend it," he said.
.....more

[cthrumatrix]

6. bush just said there should be total transparency for press

they should be asking about this

[pandorasox]

7. Check out a few charity salaries

at the bottom of this page

[cthrumatrix]

8. Charity obviously begins at "home" with these "crooks"

[AP]

9. A lot of aid (especially from NGOs) is designed to cultivate dependency.

There were some articles linked here at DU in the past which set out the argument that a lot of, for example, NGO funding comes from private corps (or from campaigns funded by private corps) who then benefit from the aid. For example, surplus US wheat which couldn't be sold by US ag companies in first world markets is purchased by the NGO and dumped on an African country where it is of such low quality that most of it ends up rotting in a warehouse.

When that African country begs for funding for an irrigation system which would allow them to become self-sufficient (and to build up an indigenous agricultural system which might end up driving down international prices for ag products, thus hurting the profits of western ag companies -- no irrigation systems unless it's for a western owned farm, and in that case the country wouldn't be begging for it) the NGOs say no fucking way because their corporate benefactors would fly off the handle if that happened.

So even the money that makes it through isn't really designed to make anything better.

The thing about charity towards the third world is that the people who write the $10 checks might be acting out of a sense of moral obligation, but the boards of the millions of dollars a year aid agencies know which side the bread is buttered on, and they aren't going to do much to make a real difference.

That's the way I read the situation.

Of course, I could be wrong.