|
Letter to the Irish Times, 14th June 2006
Madam,
In congratulating Joe Humphreys on his excellent two-part
series on corruption in Africa, might I be permitted to explain
clearly GOAL's stance on government to government aid?
Having been involved for the past 29 years in trying
to alleviate the suffering of some of the poorest and most vulnerable
people on the planet, I have come to the conclusion that government
to government aid, in cases where the government of the recipient
country is either corrupt or guilty of massive human rights abuses,
is a complete waste of money and morally questionable.
The poor of the developing world desperately need
every euro directed towards them. When Western governments use corrupt
governments to dispense the aid, they know the huge risk they are
taking.
If there were more developing countries with Nelson
Mandela-like leaders who genuinely cared for their people, then
government-to-government aid would be acceptable. But the reality
is that few countries on the continent have enough honest officials
who can deliver aid, medicines or schoolbooks without paying or
receiving bribes or exploiting the aid for political patronage.
GOAL believes there are safer methods of getting aid
to deserving people when the recipient country's administration
has shown itself to be corrupt. For years we have advocated that
the Irish Government "adopt" one country and opt to implement
humanitarian projects itself in that country. In that way, the risk
of the money falling into wrong hands is significantly reduced.
- Yours, etc,
JOHN O'SHEA,
|
