Inkless Wells

 Inkless Wells

Paul Wells on all the latest out of Ottawa—along with the occasional post about jazz. Follow Paul on Twitter: @InklessPW

Categories: Capital Read, Inkless Wells

"To be frank, it's not a convincing argument"

by Paul Wells on Monday, January 18, 2010 11:29am - 17 Comments

Our colleague Michael Petrou files his first dispatch from Haiti, and stirs up a debate about how, and by whom, aid should be distributed.

Tags: , ,

Bookmark and Share
  • kcm

    Sadly, good intentions and competence are not necessarily synonymous. Really thinking and acting outside the box are not at all a common occurence.

  • Mulletaur

    CIDA is a disgraceful waste of taxpayers' funds which should be wound down at the earliest possible opportunity. The money that CIDA presently gets should be used to encourage the formation of small, entrepreneurial organizations like Singh's rather than the bloated bureaucracies of the foreign aid mafia.

  • lifeonqueen

    NGOs are expected to be accountable – to funding agencies/partners, local government & international authorities. It creates a bureacracy but when Global Medic is back in Toronto, CIDA & the UN will still be in Haiti trying to achieve long-term progress. Global Medic appears to be doing good but in a month, who's still going to be in Haiti? Chances are, not Rahul Singh.

    • Mulletaur

      Ha ha, the aid mafia speaks.

      Global Medic's mission is to provide emergency relief, so there is no reason to expect it to be there in the long term. Oh, and GlobalMedic "strives to deliver the maximum amount of aid with the minimum operating cost." The same cannot be said of CIDA and UN organizations.

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/Inkless Inkless

        Petrou's post makes no reference to CIDA or to UN organizations.

        • Mulletaur

          Um, yes it does :

          "Global Medic has an annual budget of a few hundred thousand dollars. The Canadian International Development Agency, by comparison, spends one hundred million dollars a year in Haiti alone. This doesn’t mean that Global Medic is popular with other, bigger and more established NGOs."

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/Inkless Inkless

            Fair enough. But the bulk of his reporting, his post and his argument has to do with comparing Global Medic with…an NGO…. which stands for "non-governmental organization."

          • Mulletaur

            Petrou can correct me if I'm wrong, but I understand the point he is making in the first part of this article to be that large organizations such as CIDA, Care and the United Nations are so busy "co-ordinating efforts with other organizations" and "work(ing) through a local committee" that they are not actually distributing anything – Care distributes 600 water packets versus Global Medic's 25,000.

            Oh, and CIDA does much of its work through NGO's, not directly itself.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/A_logician A_logician

    It's easy to be critical, but to deliver emergency aid efficiently and quickly in a country that was already a disaster before the earthquake, with its remaining infrastructure virtually destroyed, with widespread government corruption and 3000 criminals freed from prison by the quake roaming the streets must be the very definition of a daunting task.

    • Mulletaur

      It becomes particularly difficult when you add to all of those barriers a pencil pushing bureaucracy which suffocates itself with self-imposed restrictions while people die of hunger and thirst waiting for aid to be delivered.

  • Trillium

    I will repeat: At long last we've come to the point of realizing there should be only one group in charge of any and all aid.

    This business of 30 countries all racing to the rescue to gain headlines and 'look good' to their own voters has got to stop. They just keep bumping into each other, arguing over everything, and not even their radios are compatible.

    Our current practice kills more people than it saves.

  • Candace

    Trillium: "At long last we've come to the point of realizing there should be only one group in charge of any and all aid. "

    You came to that conclusion, after reading the article, how? I would argue that the article provides an effective argument against your statement, particularly with respect to immediate, emergency relief.

    lifeonqueen: "Global Medic appears to be doing good but in a month, who's still going to be in Haiti? Chances are, not Rahul Singh. "

    I guess you skipped over the part where Global Medic trained locals on the water purification process so they might not NEED Global Medic next week, let alone next month? As well, when there are between 1-2 million in dire need of water, TODAY, does it not make more sense that there are a number of 'guerilla' aid groups like Global Medic, providing water and training to those in need ASAP while the larger NGOs – who will, as you say, be there months down the road – figure out how to distribute the goods on the long term?

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/Jenn_ Jenn_

      Unless we had one centralized aid, uh, depot–which could provide quick, no-frills, short-term emergency care; as well as a more structured, working with the community, longer-term aid.

      I have no idea how you could set up such a thing–particularly because each country wants to advertise its good works, such as emblems on water bottles and food hampers, and I'm not sure they would give quite so generously without seeing a gratitude component. That sounds horrible, but I mean if Canada is giving, say $100 million all told, and let's say, Portugal is giving $20,000., wouldn't we want the people of Haiti to understand that? The same is true of the missionary-type aid providers. On the other hand, if each country were to pay out a certain percentage of GDP or something to this blanket organization, perhaps plain old keeping up with the Joneses would ensure that money is actually paid. Anyway, it's worth thinking about.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/doug_rogers doug_rogers

    Thunderbirds are go!

  • John W.

    I hate to say this but Obama has really botched this one, almost as bad as Bush in Katrina, but that was a US state so it should have been easier. But still, over Port au Prince the sky should have been blocked by a canopy of parachutes each with an American soldier on the end. And that should have happened about Wednesday or Thursday. And by Friday the city should have been full of troops, helicopters hovering like bees in the sky.

    • Mulletaur

      "I hate to say this but Obama has really botched this one … "

      How, exactly ?

  • http://www.nissology.com Hans

    Here's my view: Haiti's tragic history has left it virtually a failed state anyway. Even after we pour billions in humanitarian relief does that get us back to square one in Haiti i.e. poverty, corruption and environmental destruction? If we really want to help the residents of Haiti, lets offer large scale expedited refugee migration for all those who want to leave: Canada, France and USA could all take 1/3 which would be at most 3 million people each. Get Baby Doc Duvalier to pay for it since he the money he is living on now came out on the backs of the Haitian people in the first place. That would offer better hope for many Haitians.

Previous

Next

From Macleans