|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 30th, 2008 From: unobserver at iom.int MYANMAR - UK Backs IOM Medical Teams in Cyclone-Affected Irrawaddy Delta - The UK’s Department for International Development (DFID) has pledged £428,000 (US$ 850,000) to support IOM medical teams providing primary health care to Cyclone Nargis survivors in the Irrawaddy Delta. IOM mobile medical teams, using Zodiac inflatables and other boats to access remote locations hit by the cyclone, have treated over 24,600 patients in 327 villages in the Delta townships of Bogale, Pyapon and Mawlamyinegyun since the cyclone struck Myanmar on 2nd May. IOM has also set up 15 temporary tent clinics in areas where medical infrastructure was completely or partially destroyed by the cyclone. “People are mainly suffering from the effects of unclean water and food, lack of proper shelter and clothing, and a lack of proper sanitation,” says IOM Myanmar National Health Coordinator Dr Aye Aye Than, who heads up the Bogale health team. The DFID funding will support both the mobile teams and the clinics for up to six months, employing some 44 medical staff, together with ancillary logistics and coordination personnel, as well as paying for essential medicines and medical supplies. “This funding will allow us to meet one of our top priorities - continuing to deliver primary health care to cyclone survivors - while communities start to recover and rebuild pre-cyclone health infrastructure,” says IOM Health Programme Manager Dr Nenette Motus. “We are also appealing for additional funding to rebuild primary health care facilities and birth centres, strengthen the delivery of mental health services and raise HIV and AIDS awareness in communities displaced by the cyclone,” she adds. IOM’s Cyclone Nargis relief operations in the Delta are now coordinated from offices in Bogale, Pyapon and Mawlamyinegyun townships. In addition to providing direct medical aid, they have included the ongoing distribution of relief items including tarpaulins, jerry cans, chlorine for water purification, hygiene/family kits, rain ponchos and insecticide-treated mosquito nets. Other donors contributing to IOM’s response to the disaster include the UN Central Emergency Response Fund (CERF), USAID/OFDA, the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC), AmeriCares Foundation, International Medical Corps, and Chevron. ——————– In the light of the continuing releases by Inner City Press - from the UN building in New York - the UN has lost at least US$10 million in fraudulent exchange rates with the Myanmar government - so how does the UK handle these disbursements for the humanitarian activities in Myanmar/Burma? Sir John Holmes, the UN Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator, is from the UK and it seems that he is continuously fooled by the Burmese Officers’ junta. We just picked up articles with information right out of Myanmar - http://www.irrawaddy.org/article.php?art… http://www.irrawaddy.org/article1.php?ar… Currency Loss Unacceptable, but UN Aid to Continue: Holmes
“The losses are significant, but not absolutely gigantic,” John Holmes, the UN’s under-secretary-general for humanitarian affairs, told reporters at the UN headquarters in New York on his return from a three-day trip to Burma. Holmes was in Burma last week visiting parts of the Irrawaddy delta, which was devastated by Cyclone Nargis in the first week of May, to review the progress of humanitarian relief work in the region, and then traveled to the new capital, Naypyidaw, to meet the prime minister and other senior junta officials. This was the first visit to Burma by a top-level UN official since Secretary General Ban Ki-moon’s trip to the country in May. Holmes estimated that the UN, which was initially reluctant to acknowledge the substantial loss of foreign aid money due to a currency exchange mechanism dictated by the junta, has lost some US $10 million of the $200 million in aid money it has so far dedicated to the relief effort.
Holmes said, clearly the current situation “is not acceptable when we’re losing 20 percent, even if it’s only on some of our expenditures.” He acknowledged that donors have expressed concern about the matter, but this is unlikely to have any adverse impact on these countries’ contributions towards the UN flash appeal, which now totals $482 million. “This is a complicated issue, which we’ve had some time getting our heads around,” he said, adding that OCHA, which he heads, was not aware of the extent of the loss when he presented the revised appeal. “If we had known it at that time, maybe it would have been better to include it in the appeal,” he said in response to a question. “Obviously we would like to have a situation where there was no exchange loss. The ideal situation would be if we could pay with our dollars and get the market rate back in kyat—and that is what we’re asking for,” he said. “Perhaps we were a bit slow to recognize—because the spread suddenly widened in June—how big a problem this was going to become for us. We have recognized it and are taking it up with the Government,” Holmes said. Giving his impression of the progress of the humanitarian relief operations in the Irrawaddy delta, Holmes expressed a sense of satisfaction and said he appreciated the steps taken by the Burmese military junta in this regard. “We’re in a much better position than we were just a couple of months ago,” Holmes said. Citing major efforts to rebuild homes, repair schools and get health clinics up and running, Holmes said there has been a lot of progress in the last two months. Farming and other agricultural activities were also picking up, he said. “A degree of normality” is beginning to return in some areas around the delta region, with many schools functioning and increased traffic on major waterways, he observed. At the same time, Holmes asserted that challenges remain with regard to the humanitarian relief work in the Irrawaddy delta. “There is no room for any kind of complacency. There is still a lot to do to make this operation a lasting success and to reach all people with what they need for a sustained period,” he said. The main challenge for the next few months, Holmes said, is to ensure a more systematic pipeline of aid, both food and non-food items. It is important to reach out to those in the most remote areas who were difficult to reach because of poor infrastructure. “Systematic aid delivery is needed for at least six to nine months,” he said. Among other challenges for the relief operation is the drop in the number of World Food Programme helicopters from ten to five. Holmes hoped that some of these five could be kept flying for at least three or four months. This is to ensure that the most remote areas could be reached by aid workers delivering goods and supplies, he said. ——————- UN loses $10m aid in Burma exchange rate scam. The UN has admitted losing about $10m (£5m) to the Burmese regime while delivering emergency aid to the country in the aftermath of Cyclone Nargis because of a distorted official exchange rate. The UN’s senior humanitarian aid official said it had suffered the “significant” loss because the junta enforced an artificial exchange rate that was at least 15 per cent lower than the genuine rate. It has been alleged that the UN had been aware of the loss for weeks and had accepted it as the price of “doing business” with the regime. “We were arguably a bit slow to recognise… how serious a problem this has become for us,” John Holmes, the under-secretary general for humanitarian affairs, told reporters in New York. “It’s not acceptable.” The losses came about because of the system whereby, when providing aid, the UN uses foreign exchange certificates with a nominal value of $1 each that are then exchanged for the local currency, the kyat, at a rate set by Burma’s military government. The market rate for kyats is close to 1,100 per dollar, but the UN exchange rate is now about 880. As a result, the Burmese regime has been making a healthy profit even as the UN provides emergency support. Mr Holmes said he did not know where the money was going or who was directly benefiting. The Inner City Press blog that first posted the allegations of the losses said some humanitarians believed that allowing the government of General Than Shwe to make a profit was a price worth paying. It also said officials have been aware of the losses since early June. This month, the UN issued an appeal for more than $300m in extra aid for the country. —————— We do not say that the loss of funds caused by the fact that the humanitarian activity happens within a country with a very unsavory regime, but we do say that in the private enterprise world a manager with performance like this would be sacked - and this performance is not from just now, and not only by Sir Holmes, but just the same from the UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon under whose watch this goes on, and under the Administrator of the UNDP Kemal Dervis, under whom similar activities went on in other similar unsavory regimes the like of North Korea. As said, much more on this can be found on www.InnerCityPress.com and we posted also a general article about this lack of oversight on the part of the UN: “Now it is Accepted Officially At the UN, Something www. SustainabiliTank.info Argued Three Years Ago - The UN Funds The World’s Worst in a Neat Way - Call It Exchange Rates. We Had Brought This Up As A Way UNDP Did Fund The North Korean Atom Bomb, Now UNSG Holmes Recognized As Correct The ICP Statement That The UN Funds The Myanmar Government.” As we realize that it will be hard to come by accountability at the UN, the purpose of our posting this is to ask if the UK government is ready to assume oversight for the funds for which it caries responsibility to UK taxpayers? Further, we see that also USAID/OFDA, the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC), or the US and Swiss taxpayers, are funding these operations also. So what do the US and Swiss Administrations say of the transfer of funds to the Burmese junta rather then the full use of those funds for the humanitarian work? Also, even when NGOs or an oil company like Chevron, spend money on a humanitarian operation, these funds are mostly tax-deductible, so again the regular Joe who pays the taxes, it is his money, that was mismanaged under UN auspices.
Permalink | ### |
Printer Friendly
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 29th, 2008 U.N. admits “significant” Myanmar exchange rate loss. http://www.smartbrief.com/alquemie/servl… UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - The top U.N. humanitarian affairs official said on Monday the world body had suffered “significant” losses while delivering cyclone aid to Myanmar due to a distorted official exchange rate. Earlier this month, the United Nations issued an appeal for more than $300 million (150.5 million pounds) in extra aid to cope with the effects of Cyclone Nargis that struck the Irrawaddy Delta region in early May, leaving around 140,000 people dead or missing. Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs John Holmes told reporters the United Nations has lost about $10 million in currency exchanges so far as it pays for a variety of goods and services in Myanmar. “We were arguably a bit slow to recognize … how serious a problem this has become for us,” Holmes said, adding the loss was “significant” and that the spread between the market and official rates widened suddenly in June. “It’s not acceptable,” he added. (THAT IS MR. HOLMES OF THE UN.) The market rate for kyats is around 1,100 per dollar but the U.N. rate is now around 880, according to the Inner City Press www.innercitypress.com), a blog that covers the United Nations and first raised the currency exchange issue. Holmes said the United Nations did not include the issue of the exchange rate losses in the appeal documents because U.N. officials “were not aware of the extent of the loss.” Holmes, who spoke at the United Nations after returning from a trip to the Irrawaddy Delta, said relief efforts were improving, with almost everyone affected by the cyclone now having been reached with items like food or shelter. A revised appeal for aid of $482 million had raised about $200 million so far, he said, adding that initial indications from donors were “quite positive.” He later said he was not aware of any countries refusing to contribute because of the currency loss but that donors were only just realizing themselves the extent of the problems. Withdrawing aid would only hurt the people of the Delta who needed help, he said. OVERVALUED EXCHANGE RATE U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad said he was looking into the issue. “Of course we are against any waste of resources that taxpayers around the world and member states provide to meet the needs of people around the world,” he said on the sidelines of a Security Council meeting on unrelated issues.
The International Monetary Fund raised the issue of what it described as Myanmar’s distorted official exchange rate in a report in November 2007. { www.SustainabiliTank.info raised the issue way back in 2006 and this was one of the reasons that when the UNSG for Communications and Public Information (the UN DPI) was changed by the incoming new UNSG Ban Ki-moon, our accreditation with the UN DPI was withdrawn - the UN just was not ready to accept our line of questioning. We wondered for how long this suppression of facts will continue, and are now gratified that changes are forthcoming. We hope therefore that with a new US President there might be a higher demand for the truth also at the UN. we know that here, like at the US Supreme Court, changes will have to grow organically - so the world will still have to do with the present conditions for a long time to come. } “The use of the highly overvalued official exchange rate for conversion purposes results in understatement of external trade and the foreign component of consumption, government expenditures, and investment,” the IMF said in the report said then the IMF. Holmes said it was unclear where the exchange rate losses were going and who specifically was benefiting. {YES, EVENTUALLY THE UN WILL START SEEING WHERE THESE MONEYS WERE GOING - WE ARE CONFIDENT THAT A PERSON OF HOLME’S STATURE WILL BE CAPABLE OF SEEING THE DARKNESS IN HIS TUNNELS - WILL THE TAXPAYERS IN THE DONOR COUNTRIES SPEAK UP? FACE IT, EVEN CHARITIES END UP BEING BAILED OUT BY THE SIMPLE JOE WHO PAYS THE TAXES - MOST NGO CHARITIES ARE TAX DEDUCTIBLE - SO PLEASE THERE IS NO BAMBOOZLE HERE. } Permalink | ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 22nd, 2008 The 10-member ASEAN comprises Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam. They are joined by Japan, China and South Korea in the ASEAN Plus Three talks. This is the 13 member Asian cover. The East Asia Summit involves these 13 plus Australia, New Zealand and India. Then comes the ARF - Asean Regional Forum - that includes these 16 and Canada, North Korea, Russia, the U.S., the EU and others - so here we get the whole Eurasian world with the addition of the US and Canada, and with the exclusion of Africa, Latin America and the Small Island States. The ASEAN Regional Forum will meet in Singapore on this Thursday - on Thursday - July 24, 2008. The series of meetings hosted by the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, is held annually in the summer to prepare for the leaders’ Summit later in the year that will focus mainly on food and security, disaster management, economic conditions and climate change issues, Japanese Foreign Ministry officials said in Tokyo. The ARF now will place specific emphasis on security issues, particularly disaster relief, counterterrorism, maritime security, and nonproliferation and disarmament, according to the officials. The whole onion reminds us of what went on under the cover of the runnup to the Hokkaido G8 meetings earlier this month. This time, the Summit will include only the 13 States that amount to the 11 Asian States including India and the auxiliaries from Australia - New Zealand. This Summit will leave out the TransAtlantic party goers. Permalink | ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 9th, 2008 D8 summit calls for halt to biofuels. The world should halt the development of biofuel crops on arable land and instead boost agricultural production to solve the global food crisis and prevent “disaster”, the Malaysian and Indonesian leaders warned on Tuesday at the opening of a developing countries summit. Abdullah Badawi, the Malaysian prime minister, said the use of arable land for biofuels “should be stopped because such action will deepen the global food scarcity and further drive up food prices”. “We must not allow the zeal for energy security to come into direct conflict with the basic need for food production,” he told the Developing Eight summit in Kuala Lumpur.
“The idea is to reduce greenhouse gases and to wean themselves away from dependence on fossil fuels,” he said in his speech. “It is not a good idea: it has only worsened the global food crisis.” The leaders’ statements join a growing consensus that biofuel production has contributed more to soaring food prices than was thought to be the case until a few months ago. On Monday Britain hinted it might reassess its biofuel targets after a review by a former Environment Agency chief indicated that while there is probably enough land to meet agricultural needs until 2020, biofuels had contributed to rising food prices. The World Bank has expressed similar sentiments to the British report.
The president is now en route to Japan to meet with the G8 leaders on Wednesday. Indonesian officials said he would urge the G8 members to “share the burden” endured by developing countries in the face of soaring oil and food prices. Both Mr Badawi and Mr Yudhoyono stressed the need to find ways to boost agricultural production. Neither, however, mentioned whether they would halt, let alone reverse, their planned expansions of oil palm plantations. Indonesia and Malaysia are, respectively, the world’s largest and second largest producers of palm oil, which is becoming increasingly popular as a biofuel. Much of the development, particularly in Indonesia, has come at the expense of vast swathes of rainforest, which is widely considered to exacerbate climate change. Mr Badawi also took aim at the oil futures market, suggesting the international community “examine how [it] might be organised to assist in stabilising [oil] prices.” He said the summit should send a united message on how to confront the oil and food price crises. Analysts believe the D8 will struggle to reach consensus on what to do about high oil prices because it comprises both significant oil producers and consumers. The summit is also expected to approve a roadmap to strengthen cooperation between D8 members, particularly on intra-member trade. The aim is to boost this from the current figure of $60bn to $517.5bn within a decade. Permalink | ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 9th, 2008 Global Markets - latest news No formal greenhouse targets at G8 summit. By William L. Watts & Chris Oliver, MarketWatch. a Wall Street Journal Blog. LONDON (MarketWatch) — Leaders of 16 nations at a multilateral gathering in Japan agreed to back a plan for making long-term reductions in greenhouse-gas emissions, although the deal fell short of establishing formal reduction targets. “We, the leaders of the world’s major economies, both developed and developing, commit to combat climate change in accordance with our common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities,” the nations said Wednesday in a communiqué at the Group of Eight summit in Hokkaido. The G8 nations include the United States, Japan, Germany, France, Great Britain, Italy Canada and Russia. Backers included Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, South Korea, Mexico and South Africa, in addition to the G8. But the joint statement didn’t include language from Tuesday’s statement issued by the G8 leaders, in which they said they shared a vision to cut greenhouse emissions in half by 2050. See full story. Only three of the non-G8 countries in attendance — South Korea, Australia and Indonesia — backed the 50% reduction, Reuters reported, and this prevented inclusion of the language in Wednesday’s statement. Leaders of emerging economies have argued that developed countries should first spell out their own goals for emissions reductions. All the same, President Bush hailed the final statement as a sign of “significant progress.” In the end, Wednesday’s statement said the leaders shared a vision for “long-term cooperative action, including a long-term global goal for emission reductions that assures growth, prosperity, and other aspects of sustainable development, including major efforts towards sustainable consumption and production, all aimed at achieving a low-carbon society.” William L. Watts is a reporter for MarketWatch in London. So both gentlemen were not in Hokkaido - their reporting is based on material they read on the web - Did the WSJ really see it like we did - that this G8 exercize, under Japan leadership subservient to the US wishes, will not come up with real and meaningful results? —————— If it was a G8 meeting - why not take as final decision what was decided already on Friday without the participation of the other 8? Brazil, China, India, Mexico, and South Africa - the remaining 5 out of the additional 8 - plain and simple said that they do not participate in games when the G8 do not have the stomach for real figures put down in real time. By saying that they want first to see a real offer from the G8, before putting on the record their own participation in emissions reduction, they are actually in full rights and have done nothing worse then pointing flashlights at the meager document of the G8. As we said already in another posting today, it was the Bush, Harper Fukuda position that doomed these 2008 G8 meetings under Japan leadership. President Bush won this battle. Our only remaining question is - why did Fukuda invite the other 8 to participate? Had the G8 met in their own closed cocoon and come up with a final declaration, was that not expected to be better then having a bigger show with folks to be held later as responsible for this failure? What does now Fukuda frame next to his Prime Minister chair in order to say that the meeting he chaired was a success? —————– And the previous article - a day earlier - that was referenced in the July 9, 2008 article - The VISION thing that came to nothing a day later: G8 leaders share ‘vision’ on emission cuts. LONDON (MarketWatch) - Leaders of the Group of Eight wealthy nations on Tuesday said they shared a “vision” to cut global greenhouse gas emissions in half by 2050. In a joint statement on the environment and climate change, the G8 leaders said they “seek to share” with all parties involved in U.N.-brokered talks “the vision of … the goal of achieving at least 50% reduction of global emissions by 2050, recognizing that this global challenge can only be met by a global response.” Japan and the European Union are seeking to formalized emission-reduction targets, building on last year’s general agreement among the G-8 nations to “consider seriously” the reductions. The U.S. and several other developed countries { read here Canada and Japan } have said they will not enter an agreement to reduce future greenhouse gas emissions which does not include binding commitments by growing industrial powers such as China and India to cut carbon. German Chancellor Angela Merkel said she was pleased with progress made toward climate change and other issues following a morning meeting with President Bush. “As always, we’ve had a very interesting exchange of view, very intensive exchange of view, and let me tell you that I’m very satisfied with the work that has gone on, on the G8 documents, as regards progress on the issue of climate change, cooperation in the area of food and oil,” Merkel said at a photo opportunity with Bush. This year’s summit, held at a lakeside resort on the northern Japanese island of Hokkaido, brought together leaders from 22 nations, including the top G8 officials. { 8+8+5 - the last five are Africans in need and they were not even deemed a reference in the article the following day that speaks of 16 - so, our question is even more to the point - if you had no intention in bringing these other 13 into the decision making process, except for eventually blaming the first 5 from among the second group of 8 for the failure, who needed here also the second group of five that did not even get invited to dinner? All of this is part of our various postings these last few days. We predicted disaster - and here it is starring at us } Permalink | ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 9th, 2008 Missed Opportunity for G8 Leaders on Climate Change Says Achim Steiner. Nairobi, 9 July 2008 - As the G8 Summit wrapped up in Japan, Achim Steiner, the Executive “We are under pressure to act. We have no time left to waste,” said Mr Steiner. ” However, I Mr Steiner noted that the G8 countries’ agreement to reduce carbon emissions by at least 50 “I think the G8 delivered what it could. But in terms of what the world needs, what the “The G8 Summit has not delivered enough leadership. We have some 500 days until we meet in “We are beyond the rhetoric of climate change. We must now put numbers on the table. We must Mr Steiner noted that a number of countries including Germany, Norway and the UK as well as South Africa and Indonesia are now committing to targets. “But when we look at the implementation of emission reduction targets under the current Kyoto Protocol, a number of industrialized nations are not even delivering on these relatively small targets. So what incentive is there for developing nations to make major investments if developed nations are not willing to take these significant steps forward?” “We will continue to be stuck until all industrialized nations commit to firm targets–ones to ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on July 7th, 2008 You can now register online for Carbon Market Expo Australasia 2008 by visiting http://www.carbonexpo.com.au The event boasts a “cutting edge” speakers programme, workshops and Trade Fair and will be attended by a diverse range of businesses including; · energy providers and other significant industries with corporate abatement strategies Fiona Wain Tony Beck On behalf of the Organising Committee For further information please contact; Permalink | |