Saturday, August 20, 2005
Two Views on African Poverty
I recently read this article in the Orillia Today, a local newspaper. I then wrote a response to it as I was frustrated by its one dimensionalism and utter pessimism. After all is said and done, one cannot dismiss the fact that the two articles highlight the major debates that exist within the development community. Karibu, bienvenue, welcome.
Good money after bad
By: Claire Hoy
(In: Orillia Today, August 19th 2005)
Stephen Lewis, the United Nations envoy on AIDS in Africa, a man who never saw a TV camera he couldn't speak into, was quoted on the eve of the recent G8 summit meeting in Scotland fretting that the western leaders would concoct a "smoke-and-mirrors" claim of doubling aid to Africa.
Lewis, a former Ontario NDP leader, should know. He is someone who has long believed that the answer to everything is money: not his money, but taxpayers' money.
And to show that he means what he says, Lewis has consistently lived off the avails of taxpayers in a host of jobs for government and public institutions.
While suggesting that the recent Live 8 concerts featuring Bob Geldof and Bono are positive, Lewis told the Globe and Mail that it has led some people to feel a need to declare victory.
"I'm not suggesting that there won't be increases," he said, "but I also believe that we're missing a God-given opportunity to restore health and wealth to Africa."
God has little to do with it.
Nor does an accusation from Lewis that the western leaders were hoking up a "flim-flam" victory declaration so that British Prime Minister Tony Blair could meet his target of adding $25-billion (U.S.) in annual aid to Africa in five years.
(Imagine a guy working for the UN having the nerve to accuse anybody of "flim-flam." Geez.)
No doubt all those people who attended the Live 8 concerts went home feeling good about themselves, believing they have contributed to fighting rampant starvation, AIDS, poverty and a host of other ailments plaguing Africa.
As everybody knows, the summit was dramatically overshadowed by the murderous terrorist attack in London, but even so, G8 leaders agreed to double aid to Africa, to $50-billion a year, and to cancel the multilateral debt of 18 poor countries, most of them in Africa, a deal worth $40 billion.
No amount of money would satisfy Lewis and his crowd, but $50-billion is still a fair chunk of cash.
So what's the problem? Well, there's one thing missing in this whole debate: accountability.
Yes, the G-8 declaration called on the African countries to commit themselves to "democracy, good governance and the rule of law." That'll be the day.
Yes, some African countries are trying to fight corruption and greed, but most aren't. Most continue to be run by tyrants who, rather than use foreign aid to help their own people, tend to help themselves, build huge palaces, acquire fleets of expensive cars, and build their own armies to keep their people in place. This is the real crime of despair in Africa.
It's not an unwillingness of the west to give generously. Since 1960, for example, western nations have donated $500 billion to Africa.
But precious little has come of it. Africa is worse off than ever.
It is not unreasonable for taxpayers to demand some accountability whenever their dollars are spent. As we've seen in the sponsorship scandal in our own country, Liberals aren't exactly fussy about accounting for tax dollars, but that scandal, bad as it is, pales by comparison to the amount of money Prime Minister Paul Martin and his fellow leaders are dedicating to Africa.
The African Union itself estimates that the continent loses up to $148-billion U.S. a year to internal government corruption.
None of that gets to the millions of ordinary Africans who desperately need food, medicines, housing, clean water and other essentials.
In oil-rich Nigeria, for example, an economic basket case despite its wealth, the government's anti-corruption commission reported that former rulers had squandered up to $500-billion in the past 40 years.
The list goes on, but you get the point.
So for all the idealism of the rock stars, the self-serving strutting of Lewis and his ilk, the fact remains that aid to Africa, like any government spending, must be tightly monitored so that money will go to the poor rather than to the ruling elite.
There's little reason to be optimistic.
Author Misses the Full Picture
By: Dennis Tessier
I am writing in response to the Article written by Claire Hoy, entitled, “Good Money After Bad (Orillia Today, August 19th, 2005).” Although the her article has some truth to it, it is obvious that the she either has little experience in the Third World, especially in Sub-Saharan Africa, or some other political agenda, or perhaps a combination of both.
Hoy does highlight accurately the problem of corruption of African leaders as a major obstacle to the continents development. However, her discussion on corruption is one dimensional, focusing on African Leaders themselves. While an African country like Tanzania struggles to prepare 10,000 audits annually to account for their spending to donor nations and NGO’s, Hoy fails to acknowledge the fact that the corruption of African leaders is often a symptom of the corruption inherent with Western governments when dealing with Third World countries. It has been long since known that Western governments use their development aid to advance their own political and economic interests. In fact, Western governments support many African leaders because they are willing to play by their rules. Rich countries, like Canada, have their vision of Third World development and they support African elites who agree with that vision or are willing to compromise to meet the demands of donor countries. This may mean unfair trade rules, structural adjustment programs and increased poverty in addition to corruption. So who is to blame, African leaders or Western governments?
What is most disturbing about Hoy’s article is her direct attack on Stephen Lewis as a member of the United Nations. Having some experience with the United Nations I cannot refute Hoy’s argument that the U.N is an organization plagued with what she calls “flim-flam,” However, her attack on Stephen Lewis as an egotistical media hungry politician who believes money will solve the world’s problems is simply wrong. I recall watching an interview with Stephen Lewis on East Africa television while in Tanzania last year where Lewis openly criticized East African leaders on Corruption...something that is not easily done without consequence. Lewis is fighting to initiate change at top administration levels where the power lies. This is in addition to his tireless efforts to invigorate HIV/AIDS prevention at the grassroots level through education and partnerships.
The fragility of Hoy’s article is most obvious in her response to Lewis’s comment that he believes, “we’re missing a god given opportunity to restore health and wealth to Africa.” Hoy snap’s back saying, “god has nothing to do with it,” but that she fails to recognize is that Africa is a deeply religious continent, being primarily Muslim and Christian, and that Lewis’s use of “God” is much less important than the fact that “WE” are “missing the opportunity to restore health and wealth to Africa.”
If anybody should be criticized for throwing money at the problem it should be the G8. The message of Stephen Lewis, Bob Geldof, Bono and many in the global community is that debt relief is merely part of a greater parcel. The fact that Western Nations have given over $500 billion since the 1960’s should be a testament that debt relief alone does not work. In addition to debt relief, we must redefine the way we approach Third World development, conduct global trade and deal with international crisis like the HIV/AIDS pandemic in Africa. Debt relief, or at least the pledged promise of it, is a much easier task than making trade fair or giving poorer countries an equal say in the global community. The G8 wants to appease protesters not change the dynamics of global power.
In all, I commend Hoy on her efforts to bring debate concerning the plight of Sub-Saharan Africa to Canadians. However, I am afraid that her narrow view may further serve to demonize Africans while our wrong doings, as well as the positive efforts of fellow Canadians, continue to be overlooked.
Good money after bad
By: Claire Hoy
(In: Orillia Today, August 19th 2005
Stephen Lewis, the United Nations envoy on AIDS in Africa, a man who never saw a TV camera he couldn't speak into, was quoted on the eve of the recent G8 summit meeting in Scotland fretting that the western leaders would concoct a "smoke-and-mirrors" claim of doubling aid to Africa.
Lewis, a former Ontario NDP leader, should know. He is someone who has long believed that the answer to everything is money: not his money, but taxpayers' money.
And to show that he means what he says, Lewis has consistently lived off the avails of taxpayers in a host of jobs for government and public institutions.
While suggesting that the recent Live 8 concerts featuring Bob Geldof and Bono are positive, Lewis told the Globe and Mail that it has led some people to feel a need to declare victory.
"I'm not suggesting that there won't be increases," he said, "but I also believe that we're missing a God-given opportunity to restore health and wealth to Africa."
God has little to do with it.
Nor does an accusation from Lewis that the western leaders were hoking up a "flim-flam" victory declaration so that British Prime Minister Tony Blair could meet his target of adding $25-billion (U.S.) in annual aid to Africa in five years.
(Imagine a guy working for the UN having the nerve to accuse anybody of "flim-flam." Geez.)
No doubt all those people who attended the Live 8 concerts went home feeling good about themselves, believing they have contributed to fighting rampant starvation, AIDS, poverty and a host of other ailments plaguing Africa.
As everybody knows, the summit was dramatically overshadowed by the murderous terrorist attack in London, but even so, G8 leaders agreed to double aid to Africa, to $50-billion a year, and to cancel the multilateral debt of 18 poor countries, most of them in Africa, a deal worth $40 billion.
No amount of money would satisfy Lewis and his crowd, but $50-billion is still a fair chunk of cash.
So what's the problem? Well, there's one thing missing in this whole debate: accountability.
Yes, the G-8 declaration called on the African countries to commit themselves to "democracy, good governance and the rule of law." That'll be the day.
Yes, some African countries are trying to fight corruption and greed, but most aren't. Most continue to be run by tyrants who, rather than use foreign aid to help their own people, tend to help themselves, build huge palaces, acquire fleets of expensive cars, and build their own armies to keep their people in place. This is the real crime of despair in Africa.
It's not an unwillingness of the west to give generously. Since 1960, for example, western nations have donated $500 billion to Africa.
But precious little has come of it. Africa is worse off than ever.
It is not unreasonable for taxpayers to demand some accountability whenever their dollars are spent. As we've seen in the sponsorship scandal in our own country, Liberals aren't exactly fussy about accounting for tax dollars, but that scandal, bad as it is, pales by comparison to the amount of money Prime Minister Paul Martin and his fellow leaders are dedicating to Africa.
The African Union itself estimates that the continent loses up to $148-billion U.S. a year to internal government corruption.
None of that gets to the millions of ordinary Africans who desperately need food, medicines, housing, clean water and other essentials.
In oil-rich Nigeria, for example, an economic basket case despite its wealth, the government's anti-corruption commission reported that former rulers had squandered up to $500-billion in the past 40 years.
The list goes on, but you get the point.
So for all the idealism of the rock stars, the self-serving strutting of Lewis and his ilk, the fact remains that aid to Africa, like any government spending, must be tightly monitored so that money will go to the poor rather than to the ruling elite.
There's little reason to be optimistic.
Author Misses the Full Picture
By: Dennis Tessier
I am writing in response to the Article written by Claire Hoy, entitled, “Good Money After Bad (Orillia Today, August 19th, 2005).” Although the her article has some truth to it, it is obvious that the she either has little experience in the Third World, especially in Sub-Saharan Africa, or some other political agenda, or perhaps a combination of both.
Hoy does highlight accurately the problem of corruption of African leaders as a major obstacle to the continents development. However, her discussion on corruption is one dimensional, focusing on African Leaders themselves. While an African country like Tanzania struggles to prepare 10,000 audits annually to account for their spending to donor nations and NGO’s, Hoy fails to acknowledge the fact that the corruption of African leaders is often a symptom of the corruption inherent with Western governments when dealing with Third World countries. It has been long since known that Western governments use their development aid to advance their own political and economic interests. In fact, Western governments support many African leaders because they are willing to play by their rules. Rich countries, like Canada, have their vision of Third World development and they support African elites who agree with that vision or are willing to compromise to meet the demands of donor countries. This may mean unfair trade rules, structural adjustment programs and increased poverty in addition to corruption. So who is to blame, African leaders or Western governments?
What is most disturbing about Hoy’s article is her direct attack on Stephen Lewis as a member of the United Nations. Having some experience with the United Nations I cannot refute Hoy’s argument that the U.N is an organization plagued with what she calls “flim-flam,” However, her attack on Stephen Lewis as an egotistical media hungry politician who believes money will solve the world’s problems is simply wrong. I recall watching an interview with Stephen Lewis on East Africa television while in Tanzania last year where Lewis openly criticized East African leaders on Corruption...something that is not easily done without consequence. Lewis is fighting to initiate change at top administration levels where the power lies. This is in addition to his tireless efforts to invigorate HIV/AIDS prevention at the grassroots level through education and partnerships.
The fragility of Hoy’s article is most obvious in her response to Lewis’s comment that he believes, “we’re missing a god given opportunity to restore health and wealth to Africa.” Hoy snap’s back saying, “god has nothing to do with it,” but that she fails to recognize is that Africa is a deeply religious continent, being primarily Muslim and Christian, and that Lewis’s use of “God” is much less important than the fact that “WE” are “missing the opportunity to restore health and wealth to Africa.”
If anybody should be criticized for throwing money at the problem it should be the G8. The message of Stephen Lewis, Bob Geldof, Bono and many in the global community is that debt relief is merely part of a greater parcel. The fact that Western Nations have given over $500 billion since the 1960’s should be a testament that debt relief alone does not work. In addition to debt relief, we must redefine the way we approach Third World development, conduct global trade and deal with international crisis like the HIV/AIDS pandemic in Africa. Debt relief, or at least the pledged promise of it, is a much easier task than making trade fair or giving poorer countries an equal say in the global community. The G8 wants to appease protesters not change the dynamics of global power.
In all, I commend Hoy on her efforts to bring debate concerning the plight of Sub-Saharan Africa to Canadians. However, I am afraid that her narrow view may further serve to demonize Africans while our wrong doings, as well as the positive efforts of fellow Canadians, continue to be overlooked.
Monday, August 01, 2005
Stephen Lewis to Visit Orillia
Stephen Lewis, Secretary General's Special Envoy for HIV/AIDS in Africa
Photo by Nicole Toutounji, UNICEF
It is of great pleasure to discover that Stephen Lewis will be coming to Orillia on October 16th to speak at the Orillia Opera House. Stephen Lewis is an embodiment of the Canadian identity and a role model for all the globe’s citizens. Stephen Lewis is known for being a politician and a diplomat. His career includes the post of Canadian Ambassador to the United Nations from 1984-1988 and the U.N Special Advisor on Africa to aid in "the mobilization of the international community." Most recently, Mr. Lewis was appointed as the Secretary-General's Special Envoy for HIV/AIDS in Africa, a position in which he continues to work tirelessly. This October Stephen Lewis will be coming to Orillia to speak and raise funds on behalf of the Stephen Lewis Foundation, a foundation that seeks to give a voice and to assist the most vulnerable victims of the HIV/AIDS pandemic...women and children.
I recall the first time I heard Stephen Lewis speak. It was at my Undergraduate graduation at the University of Western Ontario. I had just completed my Honours degree in International and Comparative Studies and was contemplating studying my Masters in Development Studies at the University of Dar es Salaam in Tanzania. There was something telling me inside that studying in Tanzania was a good decision. After all it would provide me with valuable experience that I needed to work in the Third World. However, I could not dismiss that uncertainty that accompanies such a big decision in life. Then Stephen Lewis approached the podium.
Stephen Lewis’ words resonated a sense of urgency and importance that struck me to the core like a bolt of lightning. Never before that moment have the words of a speaker impacted me so profoundly. Stephen Lewis was able to convey to his audience the unimaginable realities of the HIV/AIDS pandemic in a way that empowered us rather than leaving us disillusioned. He encouraged us to be active participants in the creation of a more just and compassionate world. Personally, Stephen Lewis instilled in me a sense of duty…a duty to myself, to my family and friends and a duty to those whom I had yet to meet. Others in the audience were similarly impacted as I could hear discussions go on long after he had finished speaking. By the time he had finished speaking my decision to study my Masters in Tanzania had been made. It was no longer a matter of “if”, but a matter of “how”. My excuses for not going had been washed away and my mind immediately set to the task of planning for my next two years in Tanzania. Stephen Lewis certainly helped facilitate one of the greatest and most rewarding decisions I have ever made in my life. And for that I thank him and encourage you to take the time to share his life’s work with you.
For HIV/AIDS information regarding Sub-Saharan Africa and more information regarding the Stephen Lewis Foundation, I urge you to visit the website first-hand. http://stephenlewisfoundation.org/.
