| Foreign aid thread 09:36 - Jan 28 with 609 views | bluelagos |
Same as posted elsewhere - in case it gets missed by people interested.
---------------
So a few points on foreign aid, from someone who has worked on programmes (As the accountant) funded by USAID, ECHO (EU), IrishAid, DFID, GIZ and numerous much smaller funders...
So the donors (Some listed above) don't really spend money as such, they typically fund programmes that deliver xyz. So an INGO or local NIGO would seek funding for programmes by applying for funding.
The INGO would then spend the money in accordance with the donor rules (E.G. Procurement rules) and deliver the programme. They would then account to the donor for the work delivered and the money spent.
Last stage is the donor may choose to use an auditor to audit the work delivered / money spent. So I had to provide reports on the financial delivery and to then assist an auditor who would check receipts/paperwork etc. E.G. For a DFID funded programme in Malawi they were audited by PWC.
So the idea that anyone is spending money unaccounted for is utter bollx and not based on reality. The idea that money is being wasted, well that comes down to the types of programmes that the Aid agencies choose to fund. I only ever worked for agencies that did things I thought useful, such as water & sanitation, livelihoods, education programmes etc. All the stuff that you'd expect.
Now the government will impact on aid, as a donor, because they can choose where to spend their money. They do this in a number of ways, such as maybe avoiding places where human rights abuses occur, or where they feel there is too high a risk of fraud. So Nigeria receives less than it might otherwise get as donors are reluctant to spend in areas where they feel fraud is most likely.
Another way the donors impact things is targeting things in their own interests. So the argument that a country can provide future markets may well focus the minds of some. (This isn't something I support, I think aid should always go to where it is most needed)
Donors also can dictate how money is spent. So procurement can be more than following rules such as quotes / tenders. It can be, if you are buying a car, it should be sourced from their own areas. USAID and EU did this on vehicles, though it meant little in practice as Toyotas really were the only things that could get you around offroad and had a reliable servicing network. There is a reason why 90% of NGO cars are Toyotas and not Jeeps or Landrovers.
Another trend in development is the desire to build governance infrastructure in the developing world. So I have seen (not worked on) programmes funding/training the Police in Liberia. There is more focus on this than 20 years ago.
As for fraud, yeah it goes on. But not to the extent some would have you believe. And what really grates is that those who are quick to highlight it seem reluctant to recognise corruption in their own country. But hey, give a contract to your mates in a pandemic and yeah, we can justify that as we didn't have time to ensure the money was spent correctly.
And if anyone is any doubt that aid is desperately needed, then that is only because you choose not to look / consider what is happening. That position is one of ignorance, no more. If you choose to hide behind "But it is misspent" then again, that is a position of ignorance as that is a misrepresentation of how money is spent, how it is accounted for and what is actually delivers, irrespective of the frauds that happen.
And if you argue it could be spent better, then I actually agree with you. But cutting aid is not the answer to spending money better. It is the act of people who either don't understand how aid is spent or don't believe helping the most needy is what we should be doing.
Out for walk now but happy to answer any specific questions later on how it works in practice anyone might have, here on via pm |  |
| |  |
| Foreign aid thread on 11:48 - Jan 28 with 547 views | Swansea_Blue |
It's changed quite a lot over the last 30 years hasn't it. When I first started doing work for donors in the mid-late 90s we were just coming out of the 'Land Rover' phase of self interest. A lot of change happened under the period of the labour government (coincidentally, much of it). There was a switch to multilateral programmes, greater emphasis on tendering rather than cash to mates (which we're now going back to in the UK) and more accountability, as you've described.
I think I'm comfortable with aid being double-purposed. Obviously people should benefit and that should be the priority. But participation in multilateral programmes gives us political leverage too and that can be important.
Agreed ignorance is a problem. It would help for people to see how money is spent and the difference it can make; to help them better evaluate the anti-aid propaganda in certain sections of the press and politics. |  |
| |
| Foreign aid thread on 14:40 - Jan 28 with 508 views | TJS |
It would be nice if a few more countries met the OECD target of 0.7% of GNI rather than just the UK, Netherlands and Scandinavia. |  | | |
| Foreign aid thread on 18:35 - Jan 28 with 455 views | bluelagos |
| Foreign aid thread on 11:48 - Jan 28 by Swansea_Blue |
It's changed quite a lot over the last 30 years hasn't it. When I first started doing work for donors in the mid-late 90s we were just coming out of the 'Land Rover' phase of self interest. A lot of change happened under the period of the labour government (coincidentally, much of it). There was a switch to multilateral programmes, greater emphasis on tendering rather than cash to mates (which we're now going back to in the UK) and more accountability, as you've described.
I think I'm comfortable with aid being double-purposed. Obviously people should benefit and that should be the priority. But participation in multilateral programmes gives us political leverage too and that can be important.
Agreed ignorance is a problem. It would help for people to see how money is spent and the difference it can make; to help them better evaluate the anti-aid propaganda in certain sections of the press and politics. |
I actually used a 74 Landie in Kenya on one programme - drove to/from Amboselli in it including a couple of hours on dirt roads. Properly upset one of the young volunteers on the project when I ran over a chicken.
She objected that "I hadn't even tried to miss it" and after I patiently explained that I hadn't tried as I wasn't going to risk swerving a knackered old heap at 40 mph to save a chicken, she called me "A chicken murderer". | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
