East Africa Crisis Appeal
East Africa Crisis Appeal
At the Club’s Business Meeting on Thursday 16th March, we discussed how our Club could respond to the terrible famine in Eastern Africa and particularly South Sudan, Ethiopia, Kenya and Somalia. Before the meeting, I contacted Wendy Watson who is our District’s International Co-ordinator and asked her about RIBI’s advice. As always, Wendy responded quickly and clearly. The region was being hit not only by what could be the worst humanitarian crisis since 1945 but also by civil war and in-fighting by local war lords. Because of the conflicts and limited presence of Rotary in these countries, there was very little activity being undertaken by the Rotary charities that we would usually support. RIBI was therefore advising that “the best path…is to support the Disaster Emergency Committee Appeals”.
In our Club meeting, no arguments were made that we should not respond to the crisis – there was a relatively quick decision that we should donate £1500. There was however concern that it should be through the Disaster Emergency Committee (DEC). Worries were expressed about how funds raised for these charities could be used to pay significant salaries and expensive office equipment. Despite these concerns, it was agreed that we should send a cheque for £1500 to the Disaster Emergency Committee: this was felt by the majority to be more preferable than doing nothing.
So, what is the Disaster Emergency Committee (DEC)?
It consists of 13 leading charities that work in the UK. Some of them are very well known and include British Red Cross, Oxfam, CAFOD, Save the Children and also World Vision (which our Club supported for many years until this Rotary year). The charities work together to support appeals and determine who can deliver the effective disaster responses “which donors expect and those affected by disasters need”. (https://www.dec.org.uk/member-charities).
There are criteria that need to be met for a charity organisation to become a member of the DEC: these include significant scrutiny of how funds are both raised and spent. There is also a high demand for transparency and shared information so that resources are used effectively and efficiently. Within the DEC’s public information there is much focus on accountability – especially to the communities affected by the disaster or emergency. Its membership criteria highlight its commitments to ensuring that its appeals maximise responses to major overseas emergencies with highly principled approaches to governance, legality, finance and quality.(https://www.dec.org.uk/sites/default/files/PDFS/membership_criteria_-_se...)
The arguments about high salaries are always going to be an issue, especially given the hard work that goes into voluntary fund raising. One side of the argument is that it doesn’t fit well that charity funds go towards paying for someone whose salary is better than similar roles in private and public employment. The alternative argument is however that unless professionals are employed we could end up with do-gooders who are incompetent in communicating, administering or being effective as well as efficient.
Newspapers such as the Telegraph and Daily Mail are keen to expose anything that smacks of liberal hypocrisy. In recent times both papers have run stories with headlines such as “Why I no longer give to charities whose bosses take home fat cat salaries” (Daily Mail 24th February 2016) or “32 charity bosses paid over £200,000 last year” (Telegraph 26th February 2016). Although it seems more than a coincidence that both papers ran stories within a couple of days of each other, reading each article beyond the headline shows that charities include Private Hospitals (e.g. Nuffield Health) and Awarding Bodies (e.g. City and Guilds). You have to dig deeper into the articles to find that the aid charities are outside of “the fat-cat top 100”.
“Oxfam and Christian Aid, which were featured in The Daily Telegraph’s investigation, paid less than £125,000 a year to their top executive so fell just outside of this year’s top 100. Other large charities that did not make the list include Sightsavers and the RSPB, both of which have incomes of more than £100million a year.” (Telegraph, 26th February 2015)
There are other sources that could lead you to think that charities are global spongers who misdirect funds to feed the rich. However, it is not new for people with political agendas to not only distort the truth but to completely disregard it.
So where do we go from here? The long-agreed solution for Rotherham Sitwell Rotary Club has been wherever possible to make donations through the smaller and focussed charities that have strong links with Rotary. There seems to be much to be gained to continue this approach to making what are very difficult decisions. On balance, however, it was a right decision to support the Disaster Emergency Committee (DEC): we might, however, never really know if it proves to be the right decision.
Paul G. Daniels
References:
Disaster Emergency Committee( www.dec.org.uk.: last accessed 21/03/2017)
Daily Mail (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-3463094/STEPHEN-GLOVER-no-long... last accessed 21/03/2017)
Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10223961/Revealed-who-is-gettin...)