Speaker: Rethinking NZ’s Emergency Aid
68 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 Newer→ Last
-
I've suggested to David he comes back and addresses some of these very valid points, whether he does I guess depends on how much downtime your average MP has for following discussion forums - in my experience they're pretty busy - I'd be more worried if an MP did sit here all day doing a back and forth...
-
Damian - like Mallard does on Red Alert, you mean?
-
Christopher - I don't read Red Alert so I can't comment specifically - but yes, I'd suggest if an MP is spending heaps of their daytime in on- line forums, they're wasting it.
-
Wasn't remittance on the agenda at the last Pacific Forum meeting? Remember seeing it mentioned, just don't recall where.
-
lack of options for Pacific New Zealanders to send remittances.
I heard a long piece about this issue on Laidlaw's Sunday programme on National Radio a few months ago. Someone was definitely investigating just that. I'm sorry my memory is vague, but I suspect that if you wrote to RNZ about the programme you could get a useful response.
-
Sue,
now i seem to recall the biggest amount of blankets & tees etc was all organised by Michael Jones
so it's also about encouraging celebrities to support direct financial aid?
i suspect what's needed is something like city mission, of DCM. People donate to them, but don't donate to the churches that help support them
-
Hizbollah were able to predict that those towns were going to be targetted years in advance of the bombing, because they had prior knowledge that a certain militant group (called Hizbollah) was going to use those towns to launch several thousand missiles at Israel.
The Israeli bombing campaign did not simply target Hizbollah. It was aimed at the entire infrastructure of Lebanon. So perhaps not such a bad example after all.
-
Prediction of earthquakes and tsunamis is not accurate. One might or might not occur over several centuries in the Pacific Islands. No group in Samoa, Tonga or NZ is ever going to be able to provide a seamless response (unless the Ministers really do have a direct line to God), because we could not know beforehand.
Tropical storms don't seem so rare, though.
As for churches, I understand that most of the house rebuilding in Samoa is being organised through churches. With government oversight and solutions for those few without church connections, but primarily through the churches. Which is a challenge for external agencies to facilitate the reporting quality they need.
Finally, I suspect that siphoning off money in times of crisis is not readily equated with squeezing your congregation for donations. We seem to be assuming that the cultural and moral calculus yields the same result in both cases.
-
The Israeli bombing campaign did not simply target Hizbollah. It was aimed at the entire infrastructure of Lebanon. So perhaps not such a bad example after all.
Hizbollah fires thousands of rockets at Israel, Israel drops bombs on Lebanon = easily predictable within short time frame. Hizbollah easily able to make detailled advance planning for soon to be required reconstruction, its efforts hailled as "remarkable" by an oppostion MP in NZ.
Undersea volcano incrementally gains internal stress over several million years, stress released in earthquake = predictable but within much, much longer time frame. Contingency planning given priority it is relatively due, but is criticised for lacking effectiveness of Hizbollahs by same opposition MP in NZ.
Within a remarkably short time, building materials arrived, labour had been hired and basic needs met. Politics aside, [Hizbollahs action] was the most efficient and most accountable means of delivering aid to those who need it.
They had at least 5 years to plan for a military conflict they would have to concede they were going to lose, so there is absolutely nothing remarkable about the speed with which they were able to offer reconstruction assistance. Such action would have to 100% at the forefront of their thinking even before they launched their rocket attacks.
-
I'd suggest if an MP is spending heaps of their daytime in on- line forums, they're wasting it.
I would be equally disappointed if an MP didn't engage with the public with anything other than press releases. David Shearer has had many years experience at the front line and is putting forward his thoughts on a forum which is, usually, full of intelligent and informed discussion and frankly I find the initial reaction to this to be a bit of a surprise. Like "The Attack of the Armchair Experts".
. anyone else find the repeated coupling of "disaster relief aid" with "opportunities" deeply disturbing?
Could have used a better word I suppose but when you have an opportunity to help someone in need it is not exactly exploitation to take that opportunity.
There some are blatant and obvious differences between a tsunami and a military assault.
When you are on the receiving end the differences are relatively minor, destruction and upheaval are common to both.
I think David came here for a discussion not a dissection. His ideas are worth considering, maybe we can take this "Opportunity" to have some intelligent input. -
They had at least 5 years to plan for a military conflict they would have to concede they were going to lose, so there is absolutely nothing remarkable about the speed with which they were able to offer reconstruction assistance. Such action would have to 100% at the forefront of their thinking even before they launched their rocket attacks.
You've jumped from "had the opportunity to prepare" to "were prepared" without any proof. The fact that Hizbollah knew that a military reaction was likely, isn't proof that they were pre-prepared to deal with the consequences of that reaction on the civilians.
-
Yeah those are my thoughts too Steve. It's not like David has just stepped into parliament after 40 years at the district health board or something...
David has just emailed me a post - his registration into PAS doesn't sem to be working for some reason at our end, I'll post it now.
-
Posted on behalf of David Shearer
Thanks for the many comments that my blog has generated. I want to emphasise a couple of points in reply and hopefully address some the issues.
My key point is we should aim to get emergency aid more directly to those affected and let those people make the decisions about what they most need. It really follows on from principles behind longer development such as the Grameen Bank, headed by Nobel Peace Prize winner Professor Yunis, where poor people negotiate loans of cash to improve their lives. Yes, they have to repay it, but the important aspect is that they personally make the decision on how that money is spent.
My other main point is that our Pacific community is all around us and we tend to overlook its reach into the Pacific Islands. Obviously money already flows back in the form of remittances; my point is that we need to look more closely at how NZ might be able to work with organisations, such as churches, women’s groups, educational institutions and others that stretch across the Pacific when disasters strike.
On accountability issues that were raised, these are good points. But nearly all aid agencies globally fund local organisations to carry out work on the ground and there are longstanding arrangements of accounting for how those local organisations work and report on money spent. This is nothing new, the question is how can we tap into it.
I’ve worked for many aid agencies for a long time and they often do great work. But it’s important to look for ways to reach people more directly and effectively. With our Pacific population all around us in NZ, it seems that we could be working more closely with them.
-
It's good to read David Shearer's response.
Might I point out that "with our Pacific population all around us in NZ" only applies to parts of the country? And while my whanau will donate to established non-religious aid agencies, we would not, under any circumstance, donate to churches? We do not have PI neighbours or close friends - that is just the way it is in many parts of the South Island.
I think one of the best & quickest ways to assist with future emergencies in the South Pacific is to ensure that PI families here - and PI churches here - can remit monies back to kin safely, quickly, and without being exploited by commercial interests.
-
You've jumped from "had the opportunity to prepare" to "were prepared" without any proof. The fact that Hizbollah knew that a military reaction was likely, isn't proof that they were pre-prepared to deal with the consequences of that reaction on the civilians.
Sorry for not making it clear, I am assuming Hizbollah to have more than two working braincells and be capable of forward planning.
My key point is we should aim to get emergency aid more directly to those affected and let those people make the decisions about what they most need. It really follows on from principles behind longer development such as the Grameen Bank, headed by Nobel Peace Prize winner Professor Yunis, where poor people negotiate loans of cash to improve their lives.
Better example. Thanks.
-
My other main point is that our Pacific community is all around us and we tend to overlook its reach into the Pacific Islands. Obviously money already flows back in the form of remittances; my point is that we need to look more closely at how NZ might be able to work with organisations, such as churches, women’s groups, educational institutions
You made your second point redundant with your first, if I may be so bold, Mr Shearer.
You know money "flows" to the islands in the form of "remittances". Why then isnt it possible to make money available to relatives here to send via remittances directly to the people. Im sure banks would
co-operate. Any organisation will take a cut, even churches, its a matter of finding the best option.Note to the defenders of Mr Shearer Apart from the swiss cheese crack all my criticisms have been on the content of his post.
In person I'm sure he's a lovely man and well qualified, that is not in question. -
Sorry for not making it clear, I am assuming Hizbollah to have more than two working braincells and be capable of forward planning.
The alternative to your thesis is that they weren't pre-prepared, and it's just possible that David actually made a valid point.
Opportunity for forward-planning does not necessarily mean it occurs.
-
You know money "flows" to the islands in the form of "remittances". Why then isnt it possible to make money available to relatives here to send via remittances directly to the people. Im sure banks would
co-operate. Any organisation will take a cut, even churches, its a matter of finding the best option.I would suggest that people who have relatives in New Zealand, possibly working, are probably going to be the ones better off back in the islands, and best able to cope with a disaster.
And two, there's a heap of people on the islands who don't have family in New Zealand. Are we ignoring them?
-
Why then isnt it possible to make money available to relatives here to send via remittances directly to the people. Im sure banks would co-operate. Any organisation will take a cut, even churches, its a matter of finding the best option.
Really?
Then why won't they do this already? Would bank-cooperation be a special emergency-only thing? Banks just seem to be looking to screw over the islands.
-
Kyle Matthews -no, we're not ignoring "a heap of people on the islands who dont have family in NZ." NZ *as a country* provided substantial aid.
-
Kyle Matthews -no, we're not ignoring "a heap of people on the islands who dont have family in NZ." NZ *as a country* provided substantial aid.
The suggestion was to make money available to relatives here.
If that was how the system worked, then people who didn't have relatives here would get none, or substantially less.
-
I didnt see that as an exclusive "we'll only make money available to relatives here."
It might make people who have no relatives here worse off - it might not (because aid agencies could easily target people who dont have relatives overseas (and let's remember there are a *lot* of Samoans and Tongans living in countries other than ANZ. The USA comes to mind-) -
frankly I find the initial reaction to this to be a bit of a surprise
You shouldn't, really. He dared to suggest working with religious organisations, and Island ones at that, which in here is just short of suggesting that the Fire Service be compelled to hire arsonists as fire fighters.
I think he may underestimate the difficulties of trying to ensure the same levels of transparency are met by Islander-centred community groups as are currently met by the likes of Red Cross or Oxfam. As someone else observed, part of the reason for the complexity of organisation of "real" charitable aid is the transparency involved.
As an aside, when NZ Red Cross says that "every cent donated to this appeal will go to <insert special appeal cause>" they actually mean it. They're one of a very, very small number of Red Cross national societies in the world that has sufficient funding from other sources to be able to subsidise the administrative costs of special appeals. So giving cash to Red Cross special appeals is a sure-fire way of ensuring that all of your donation ends up with the relief effort.
And reiterating David's point about giving cash, not goods, too.
-
frankly I find the initial reaction to this to be a bit of a surprise
You shouldn't, really.
I must apologise Matthew, I had completely forgotten about you.
Merry Christmas.
:-) -
Matthew Poole - the only society me & mine gave to (cash) for the tsunami appeal was the Red Cross.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.