Keeping track of the aid

Keeping track of the aid

by Rachel O'Bern
Oxford Student
2/05/05

The Asian tsunami appeal raised one of the largest sums in charity history. Rachel O'Brien attended a videoconference in Oxford with Sri Lankan victims and government officials to see how effectively the money is being spent

It wasn't quite what we'd expected. Perhaps we were being naïve. The tsunami videoconference had been billed as an opportunity to speak "face to face" with victims of the enormous natural disaster, one month on. It was the chance to discuss openly what is being done with Western aid, and to understand the tasks that lie ahead for Sri Lanka.

But the pressures of bureaucracy, rather than those of humanitarianism, were to dominate last Wednesday's global conference, organised by Americans for Informed Democracy, in which students from 11 American and British universities asked penetrating questions of Sri Lankans. Government officials led the discussion in Colombo, sometimes evading questions and only with reluctance allowing civilians time to speak. When their voices were finally heard, several were noticeably concerned.

"We are a highly political society, where everything is looked at from a political angle," said a former Sri Lankan public servant. "The tsunami, too, has not escaped that."

"There has been very little discussion about the government's plan... This is an unusual situation, which calls for unprecedented measures. I do not know whether the country has come up with unprecedented measures. Let them open up what is being done. We should see a concrete programme - see what will be done with every cent contributed. We must prevent mismanagement." Wijaya Wickrema, a retired World Bank staff member and a Sri Lankan national, also voiced his worries. He had been working in Sri Lanka during the previous three weeks.

"I think the Disaster Management organisation is very bureaucratic. There are seven layers from the President of the country to the ultimate beneficiary. I told the Minister of Fisheries, whom I met, that in such an organisation, when 100 rupees is given by the President's office, only 30 rupees will reach the ultimate beneficiary."

Although Wickrema described the provincial and district level civil service as "excellent", he believes things are not working well at the ground level. "Regarding the protection of children," he commented, "there is a new policy not to allow orphanages. However, there is no written document and provincial staff are not trained on details of the new policy. There is a lot of confusion and a lack of a clear direction.

"I appeal to the Sri Lankan officials to be honest and truthful in informing the public of the problems we are facing."

Such apprehensions are not entirely surprising, given the necessarily vast scale of the reconstruction effort in a country where over 30,000 were killed and thousands more displaced. But though the crisis may be unprecedented, the fears about governmental practice and bureaucratic inefficiency are not. In a survey compiled last year by Transparency International, a non-governmental organisation devoted to combating corruption, Sri Lanka scored a 'Corruption Perceptions Index' value of 3.5 (in which ten was wholly clean and one was wholly corrupt). The results, relating to perceptions of the degree of corruption as seen by business people and country analysts, were even more alarming in other badly-affected countries: India scored 2.8 and Indonesia, the region worst hit by the tsunami, just 2.0.

At a time when billions of dollars are poured into these regions and thousands are directly in need of the funds, it is crucial that misspending and mismanagement are kept to an absolute minimum, which is why the work of this global government watchdog, Transparency International, is so important.

Whilst civilians worry about corruption and governments press for centralisation, TI is a key player in monitoring the vital interaction between governments, civil society and business in the relief effort. The organisation's Sri Lankan branch has devised a detailed plan of action for enhancing the government's accountability during the post-tsunami reconstruction.

The problems they face are exacerbated in Sri Lanka by the government's relations with the Tamil Tiger rebels. The tsunami struck at a time when the 2002 ceasefire appeared strained, and at first it was hoped that the disaster would rejuvenate the peace process. In the immediate aftermath of the disaster, Sri Lankan President Chandrika Kumaratunga called for Sri Lankans to "stand together as one country and one people, irrespective of all differences, transcending the boundaries that divide us."

Yet hopes of renewed peace talks soon faded, as rebels accused the government of blocking aid deliveries to guerilla-controlled areas. The state has rejected such claims, accusing the Tamils of not wanting to co-operate and trying to control relief in its own zones.

During the videoconference, these issues were raised in students' questions, but answers to such politically delicate subjects were glossed over by the officials who spoke. Instead they focused on more general, positive points - in particular the fact that a major outbreak of disease had been avoided. "The government has made a most impressive response", said Dr Ken Tun, a World Health Organisation representative. He added later: "From the rubble and ruin, Sri Lanka is rebuilding."

Dr Lalith Wikramanayake, chairman of Sri Lanka's Environmental Foundation Ltd, also defended the government's response to such an unusual situation: "I must emphasise the difficulty of the logistics and the capacity of a government at any single time, with only one international airport." He did mention his concerns that the government hadn't released detailed plans for rebuilding, with the result that people are returning to unstable, illegal settlements, but he also highlighted non-governmental areas of suspicion: "Let me just warn you that there could be corruption in the government but there could also be corruption in some of these mushroom organisations collecting money."

The lesson of the conference was clear: everyone should be able to see where the money is going. The funds must not be absorbed by red tape. So far, the global community has responded with remarkable generosity - so much so that one charity, Medecins Sans Frontieres, has raised three times its original target, and is now asking donors if their money can be used in other projects. (It has been reported that approximately 20 per cent of those contacted have asked for their money back.) The need for our financial donations may no longer be urgent, but as the tsunami recedes from the headlines into history, this is not a time to forget. It is groups like Transparency International that currently need our support; now the success of the relief effort depends on openness, efficiency and co-operation.

Americans for Informed Democracy: www.aidemocracy.org

Transparency International: www.transparency.org