Examination of Witnesses (Questions 120
- 143)
WEDNESDAY 24 JUNE 1998
Mr Will Day and Mr David Bryer, Mr Robert Smith,
Director, Ms Marie Staunton, and Ms R Boycott.
120. Is that when it came to Ms Boycott's attention?
(Ms Boycott) No, we went to UNICEF ourselves.
We went at the beginning of May after having been exposed to the
media images by that point and then we made the horrific discovery
that this appeal had been launched in February and they were still
way short of funds. We were assured from lots of conversations
with Marie and with other people that there was access, the funds
would get through, the money would be used and actually the money
could make a difference and so you could do a lot of things simultaneously,
ie, raise the profile of what was going on, apply political pressure
through the media, keep the story on the front page (and I am
glad the Secretary of State said it should be on the front page)
and at the same time actually be in the hands of an agency so
that the money that our readers (which came up to £400,000
of what was raised in England) gave did go to children and did
go to starving people and we needed to do it fast. There was no
point in talking at that point about long-term education which
is what we want because these children were going to be dead.
Ann Clwyd
121. I still think you have not got across the urgency
of the situation that people are faced with. We had a report from
our Ambassador in Khartoum who was there at the end of May and
he said: "The situation in Bahr El Ghazal was worse than
he had anticipated. Infants and adults (mainly women) were near
death in the six places visited. Partial rations were inadequate
and widely shared; other food sources had failed, so supplementary
and therapeutic feeding programmes, for which the admission criteria
had been unacceptably tightened, were not working; distribution
of seeds, training programmes and schools were suspended because
of the lack of food." This is already a tragedy. Do you feel
that you have got across fully the urgency of the situation, 2.2
million people faced with famine?
(Mr Smith) I think we did do everything
that we could the moment we became aware of it, that is here at
the UK Committee for UNICEF in London, because we had the visit
that Marie mentioned a little earlier by a couple of our staff
in late March and then Marie herself visited with Lord Deedes
in April and then with Oona King in May to see government held
areas as well. The moment we had the visit and had direct evidence
ourselves we launched an appeal on 25 April because we saw the
things that children were facing immediately. Separately and independently,
of course, we did advertise for funds for children in need in
Sudan and we were able to transfer money on 7 May, 22 May, 28
May, 11 June and then 23 June, totalling £2 million from
private donations, including £400,000 from The Express
appeal. So within 10-12 days of the first visit we were transferring
our first funds and we have had funds from the British government
as well totalling £900,000. I think we have done a great
deal both in the media, through the very high profile visits of
Lord Deedes, of Oona King and Marie's own work in the media. I
think we feel that we have done all that we could so far, but
we need to keep it in the public eye and I think this debate,
as was said earlier, is one of the ways in which it can be kept
in the public eye.
Mrs Kingham
122. I want to come on to this issue about keeping
it in the public eye. Both Rosie Boycott and Mr Day have mentioned
about this appeal being a way of generating public awareness and
public action. In the same breath you said that in your fundraising
material as a follow-up you would not have anything so-called
political in there. I suspect that is because from past experience
within fundraising literature you do not want to do anything too
political because it reduces the level of your donations and that
is quite factual. When you have campaigning-type information going
out to donors it reduces the level of income. What I would really
like to ask you is just where is your long-term commitment to
ensure that the British public really get a grip of what is causing
these famines and disasters because they are not acts of God,
they are political, they are political causes, they need political
actions? I feel it is the responsibility, as I think a lot of
people do, of aid agencies like yourselves to ensure that when
disasters happen you take those opportunities to tell people "These
are the campaigning actions you should be taking". And to
then put it in your newsletters in future and not have a twin
track will I know most agencies operate, of your campaign supporters
and donors and your fund-raising supporters and donors in case
the idea of politics turns off your fund-raising supporters. It
is political. Where is your commitment to following that up and
making sure we get a grip on this debate? I think it is fundamental
to all this. I do not want to be sitting around in five years'
time (if we are still here) looking at yet more examples of disaster
appeals when there is another famine somewhere. Are you going
to start from now to make a pledge that you will be educating
your donors and supporters to be doing political type work? I
particularly address that to Care actually.
(Mr Day) The DEC appeal itself made
an absolute point of saying that the problem with Sudan is basically
a problem of war and what is needed in Sudan is peace.
123. With respect, that is now. What about the interim
years between them? What are you doing in the interim years to
get people into lobby about the importance of these issues?
(Mr Day) Care International and Care
in the UK joins the kinds of groups like the landmine campaign
and international campaigns which are trying to promote change.
We are regularly in contact with DFID, ODA before that, to discuss
the kinds of issues that we are discussing round this table now
to press for change.
124. What about with the public?
(Mr Day) Like any charity we build relationships
with our supporters, I would like to call them, and you start
effectively by attracting them to the cause. You are trying to
persuade them that your particular organisation is one which they
would like to support in the longer term. The clear balance of
our portfolio, like any other charity, is for long-term development
and the key message we are trying to promote with our supporters
is that the long term is vital investment. The humanitarian disasters
that occur from time to time in many of the countries in which
we work are not quite distractions but necessary evils that we
feel we have to work with and do our best with. In terms of political
lobbying CARE's position and the position of its board of trustees
is always that when situations occur in front of and which get
in the way of CARE's long-term work where change is needed then
it is right and proper for Care to take a position on it and to
lobby appropriately.
125. With respect, I have been there on a fund-raising
level and done it so I know about building up donors and support.
Jubilee 2000 knocked a lot of those arguments on the head. People
were willing to take up the issue of national debt and get on
the streets and do something about it. You do not see it as a
matter of course that the fundamental causes of what you are actually
working on, poverty, deprivation, conflict, are political and
therefore you should have a duty as an agency to ensure that all
of your donors are engaged in that political process from day
one?
(Mr Day) All of our donors should be
informed about the issues that lie behind the problems—
Mrs Kingham: Not lobbying and engaging politically
in the debate.
Chairman: I think you have got as much of an
answer as you are going to get. Andrew Robathan?
Mr Robathan
126. I would like to pursue a different tack more
on the politics of the issue. You mentioned that conflict and
war is at the heart of this. We understand that. Maybe it is a
forlorn hope but one might hope that the Government and other
governments would have some impact on the war and perhaps attempt
a ceasefire and indeed there has been talk of a ceasefire from
the Secretary of State. I have not been to the Sudan. We are getting
very conflicting messages. On the one hand the Secretary of State
particularly said your appeal had reduced pressure on the SPLA
to agree to a ceasefire. I received some information from an organisation
on behalf of the Sudanese government yesterday which said there
was a perfectly good ceasefire on the table but the SPLA would
not take it up. On the other hand, newspaper clips suggest that
talk of any ceasefire is very one-sided and not just not to the
advantage of the SPLA but might be very much to their detriment.
I do understand the sensitivities under which you have to work
in both areas. Could you tell us, perhaps Ms Boycott, what sort
of co-operation you receive from the warring factions in the delivery
of aid. Are you receiving the assistance of the government? Are
they letting you fly? Are you receiving the assistance of the
SPLA which some people are suggesting you are helping? I do not
know.
(Mr Day) Can I say from the DEC point
of view that many non-government agencies working in Sudan are
doing so under the umbrella of Operation Lifeline Sudan and the
reason they do so is because the needs are not on one side or
other of this conflict, they are on both sides. Operation Lifeline
Sudan under a United Nations umbrella has negotiated access on
both sides of this conflict which is vital because the front line,
if such a thing exists, is a moveable feast. So in that respect
there are rules of engagement that both government and non-government
sides have signed up to which effectively gives OLS free access
to the area which means that the supplies that are delivered are
not available to forces on either side; they are available to
the people of Sudan whether they happen to be in areas controlled
by the government or controlled by the opposition. That is the
way in which organisations which are choosing to work on both
sides of this conflict operate under the umbrella of the UN which
provides a degree of neutrality in terms of access.
127. Is that generally what has happened?
(Mr Day) In our experience we could
not work without it.
128. If I might say so we have heard a lot about
the disagreements between the United Kingdom Government's position
on this, indeed the Secretary of State mentioned that your disaster
appeal reduced pressure on the SPLA to agree to a ceasefire for
instance and the position of the aid agencies and indeed Operation
Lifeline Sudan, I believe. Why have you not stressed that? You
seem to be rather less critical of the United Kingdom Government
than other people have been recently, I will not name names, but
other people.
(Mr Bryer) As I said right at the beginning
we are not critical of the UK Government or particularly of the
Secretary of State. There are a couple of things on which we do
strongly disagree. The first point is the one you have just raised.
We cannot see any possibility of British agencies raising money
from the public influencing the SPLA in its decision to establish
or not establish corridors of tranquillity, ceasefires or anything
else. We do not see the connection and the timing suggests that
there can be no connection. The other one is we feel it is appropriate
and indeed right that agencies raise money from the general public
and allow the general public to show that particular type of interest
and concern and not to rely solely on governments. Those are the
two issues on which I think we have a difference of opinion. Then
one needs to stress the issue of peace, the way the Secretary
of State is describing the problems of access and what we need
to do now on which we would have pretty strong agreement.
Mr Grant
129. Maybe Ms Boycott would like to try answering
this. I might get a straighter answer than we are getting from
the NGOs. The war in Sudan has been going for 30 years or more.
It is very difficult to resolve. I myself have been there. In
fact I am a Nubian chief. I was a made a Nubian chief when I went
to Kadugli a few years ago. The Secretary of State comes fresh
on the scene and she is on about corridors of tranquillity and
the need to resolve this matter and have a ceasefire and so on.
People have been trying to do this for 30 years. The Organisation
of African Union, the Pan-African Congress. I remember in Kampala
there were disagreements among the anti-government forces let
alone between anti-government forces and government forces. It
is hugely complex. There is the race questions and the question
of Arabism. Do you think that the Secretary of State should concern
herself with the aid issues and leave the political issues to
maybe the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and the Foreign Secretary?
Do you think that she is straying too far into trying to resolve
the conflict rather than concentrate on the aid issues which she
has responsibility for? Do you not think there is a danger that
the Secretary of State is trying to recruit the NGOs into a political
campaign which could be against your charitable position which
could prevent you from doing it?
(Ms Boycott) I think she has certainly
massively confused the issue by talking about people having compassion
fatigue and criticising the press for endlessly publishing pictures
of famine when famine was and still is at crisis point and people
were responding to a crisis. Obviously she is right about long-term
development and obviously we all go along with that. But yes,
I think she threw a tremendous spanner in the works and she made
people feel very confused about whether the money they were giving
was going to get there or was it all being swallowed up and taken
away by the wrong people and she complicated things when things
did not need to be complicated because in fact the issue is terribly
simple: there are a lot of people who are still facing starvation
and we are rich country who can help. That was it and she got
in the middle of it.
Ms King
130. I wanted to look at the recent history of the
crisis. Shortly before I went there was an estimate of 320,000
people facing starvation. When I got there it had already gone
up to 920,000. Three days later it was 980,000. When I returned
it was 1.2 million and now I see that it is between 1.3 million
in the Northern sector and 1.2 in the Southern sector. I asked
the Secretary of State about the mechanisms by which this situation
on the ground is relayed from the ground to DFID. Do you feel
that you have the necessary access as NGOs and that you are able
to sufficiently relay what we have seen here to be an astonishingly
escalating crisis?
(Ms Staunton) I think communication
has got to be two way. Yes, we do regularly talk to officials
in London, in Nairobi, in Khartoum. There is a lot of communication.
Perhaps one of the things we have learned is the systemic weekly
communication you need to track a situation like this as it is
developing very fast.
131. Is there any specific way you feel it could
be improved?
(Ms Staunton) That is one of the things
that we have decided that we need to talk to DFID about and other
agencies to see how we could improve what it is that we are doing.
Dr Tonge
132. I asked a Parliamentary Question in November
1997 about whether DFID would extend relief to Southern Sudan.
This was after the early warning in October. Her reply was there
were not any plans but she would consider proposals from the NGOs.
Did anything happen in November? Did the NGOs put forward projects
at that time? We were asking questions in the House at that time
just after the warning in October which DFID denies receiving.
We really did not see things going in until there was the crisis
you told us about in January. I think three months is a long time
in terms of famine.
(Mr Bryer) I am not aware of any particular
rise in the discussion between DFID and the NGOs at that time.
I have to say, there is a lot of communication between most NGOs
on Sudan with DFID and the Foreign Office as well. Those relations
are good and easy and open. I think it also goes back to the curious
nature of famine. It is very unclear when large groups of people
will suddenly run out of their normal coping mechanisms. I think
there was a very strong argument that that would have happened
the year before. We wrote about it in a book in 1995, published
in 1996, when we were certainly feeling this going over the edge
might happen. But I think the experience in famine across most
parts of the world is you do not actually know when it will go.
It is a curious mix. There are a whole range of things that happen
that suddenly cause much larger numbers to run out of all their
normal coping mechanisms. Obviously you cannot forecast two of
them, which is whether a drought will come from the next harvest
and whether the war will spring up at a certain time. What you
do know is you see people running out of their normal ways of
getting access to food. They run out of cash. If you had drought
over several years you would probably run out of wild foods. There
are lots of things that will happen and probably people will sell
off their possessions. So year after year it is more difficult
for them. I do think, though, you touch on an issue which is important
for us and clear to us. There is a wariness in saying a famine
is actually going to happen because we can very well be proved
wrong. So there is always a balance as to how sure are we that
this is going to happen in six months time.
133. There is lots of food in the world. The pharaohs
in Egypt thousands of years ago knew about famine and storing
it up for the mean years. (Mr Bryer) Absolutely. I think
what is coming out of this is that if there is not an interest
in a country, if there is not long-term development in a country,
if you are not building up the contingency stocks and so on at
the appropriate time, then this sort of thing will happen, but
that needs a lot of forethought over time. Those people in South
Sudan and not only in Northern Bahr El Ghazal, pretty well everywhere
and also in Northern Sudan, Darfour and Kordofan are right on
the brink all the time. We have seen since the war started in
1983 that people keep getting onto the brink. Sometimes they can
get back. Sometimes they can rely on their relatives or go somewhere
else. Sometimes they do not and they die.
(Mr Smith) I think the conflict complicates
the situation, because the appeal itself contained requests for
prepositioning supplies, but then you very often find that when
the actual time arrives you do not have the access.
Chairman: I think we should give great credit
to the people who live in these drought areas because they do,
as Mr Bryer has been describing, actually cope extremely well
most of the time and they know about drought and they know how
to keep their water supplies through these difficult periods.
They are nonetheless right on the edge at all times. The question
is one of judgment as to when it is going to become impossible.
They are generally speaking extremely good at it. I am going to
ask the Committee to cooperate with me. We have had a big question
and answer session and we have not covered the ground of our questions,
some of which have been answered. Our witnesses will excuse us
for asking some of the questions again but I just want to make
certain we cover the ground. Mr Grant, question one, please.
Mr Grant
134. Does access remain a problem in the delivery
of aid to the Southern Sudan? How is aid delivered? Is it getting
through to all the needy areas and those in need?
(Mr Bryer) I think UNICEF has given
a very good picture of the access problems, but we do need to
recognise we are just pushing at the boundaries of what is possible.
You have seen in the trip you have just had, Ann, that one Hercules
is off for repair, one has not flown in yet, the Belgians may
produce something, but the Sudan government has not yet given
permission and so on and so on. There is a real problem there.
There is the problem of fuel, ie, getting enough fuel stocked
in El Obeid and Lokichokio to run these planes. Lochichokio is
in the north of Kenya, right on the border. It has one road up
from Nairobi, one road which at the moment is badly broken down.
If that road collapses you will not get the fuel up. In El Obeid
in Northern Sudan they have only got one forklift. Some of these
things can be dealt with fairly easily, but it needs a very quick,
very efficient response. At the same time WFP is constantly trying
to raise the amount of food they are putting in. Last month they
failed to put in the amount they hoped. They have now raised their
target. That is going to be an even bigger problem and as one
of our members, Médecins Sans Frontières, has pointed
out, the rations are still quite small. The amount of food going
in is enough for slightly more than half a ration. That is still
assuming that people will have considerable coping mechanisms
which they may not. I think one has to stress that yes, access
has improved a lot, since the Secretary General made his remarks
in early May there has been a lot of effort, it has allowed a
lot of us to work more effectively, but it is pretty on the edge
and anything could go wrong in these coming months. The first
possible extra food grown from the harvest would be late August.
We need to give a picture which is pretty dicey.
135. Are people moving to the feeding centres?
(Mr Bryer) Yes, which is another worry,
of course, because I think the thing one always tries to prevent
is people moving into feeding centres because we know from the
Ethiopian famine in the mid-80s, for example, that you can get
disease and so on because of the clusters. One of the things we
are doing is putting water and sanitation around those feeding
centres. It is not ideal but it just shows the level of problems
people are having that they are prepared to up sticks and go to
feeding centres.
Ann Clwyd: Can I just ask you this question
because from the reports in the press which have be running over
a number of weeks now you seem to have had a real ding dong with
the Department for International Development. I notice that you
are particularly careful in choosing your words today and you
are much milder than you have been in print and that you are also
dependent on DFID for money from time to time. Do you feel you
have been leaned on in any way to alter what you said originally?
Chairman
136. Have you been nobbled is the question?
(Mr Day) Can I say we do not feel nobbled.
Ann Clwyd
137. Can you answer individually as well.
(Mr Day) In our written submissions
we did make made a point of listing those issues where the Secretary
of State has been reported as saying one thing and we, I hope,
have clearly reported clearly to the Committee the position of
the DEC appeal and we have clearly indicated where we feel we
do disagree. David Bryer said there were significant disagreements
with her but also the fact that the basis on which peace is an
absolute priority for Sudan, there is absolutely no conflict.
The fact remains we do feel it was absolutely correct to launch
a public appeal. United Kingdom NGOs working in Sudan felt there
was a combination of a critical problem and an opportunity to
support to do practical things with the money that was raised
and the perception was that the British public were looking to
support that work. We have our own constituencies and they are
those people who support us and with whom we are in regular contact.
I think we would disagree with the Secretary of State if she feels
it is not appropriate for those people to support good responses
in such a case. As I say, I hope that the written information
we provided to you does clearly list areas where we have chosen
to disagree. We disagree with some of the pronouncements of the
Secretary of State.
138. Are you confident that donor governments are
going to provide all the money that is necessary for Sudan?
(Mr Bryer) No.
(Mr Day) No.
(Mr Bryer) I think it needs very strong
pressure for that to happen. There is maybe just one thing to
be said. One does note that UN appeals are getting less and less
funded here. It is absolutely impossible for the UN to plan ahead
if they do not have money from two or three humanitarian appeals.
In situations like this good planning is absolutely essential
to get landing strips and roads made up. These are things you
do not do overnight. The drip feed into UN appeals is a real problem.
Anything the British Government can do to put pressure on others
is terribly important.
Chairman
139. When you talk about 25 per cent funded or 30
per cent funded you mean for the total appeal? You do not mean
to say the British Government has given 25 per cent?
(Mr Bryer) No the British Government
has given a fair proportion of the appeal, as they have in many
other appeals by the UN but that is not true of every other donor
in any way which is why WFP is only 54 per cent funded.
Ms Follett
140. I am going to unpick some areas you may have
disagreed with the Secretary of State. She said that the appeal
reduced pressure on the SPLA to agree to a ceasefire and that
some of the NGOs benefitting from the DEC appeal will use funds
received as start-up funds and some NGOs benefitting from the
appeal have not worked in Sudan or Bahr el Ghazal before. Can
you respond to those two.
(Mr Bryer) I think I mentioned earlier
my feelings on whether or not a group of British agencies raising
money would put pressure on the SPLA. Personally I do not think
so. That has to be a personal view but it is one shared by all
of us in the DEC. We cannot quite see that connection. The second
point was?
141. Some NGOs have not worked in the Sudan before.
(Mr Bryer) Within the DEC there are
15 members. The committee has recently reviewed itself and grown
from seven to 15 members. Of those 15, three immediately withdrew
from the appeal on the grounds that they did not have a major
presence in Sudan and did not feel that it was appropriate, they
did not have something specific to offer. In the DEC within 48
hours of an appeal being launched one has to put in a plan of
what one is going to do if one is going to be a member of the
appeal, so it is extremely difficult for an agency which has no
presence whatever in a country to do that. Certainly what does
happen, though, with a DEC appeal is that it allows agencies both
to step up their work and possibly to move into different parts
of the country. So there are certainly cases where agencies are
working in one part of Sudan and through DEC money they can move
themselves further into other areas and certainly Oxfam would
be an example. We are doing water work around feeding centres
run by UNICEF, among others, in Northern Bahr El Ghazal in areas
where we had not worked before. I think the idea that this is
a nice quick way of somebody coming off the street is pretty much
protected by the DEC rules. The other thing is that after the
six month period there is an evaluation of the work which is then
made public and it would be very damaging to an agency if that
evaluation said: "You came in merely to get some money out
of the appeal. You did nothing worthwhile." I think the chances
of that are extremely remote.
142. How do you react to the statement that the appeal
was only launched by the DEC because UNICEF and other individual
NGOs had not launched their own appeals?
(Mr Bryer) The timing does not work
out like that because UNICEF launched its appeal and it was two
or three days later the committee met and decided not to. Some
of our members, particularly the church agencies who have very
close relations with churches in the Sudan and work through those
churches outside the OLS and have access to areas, including the
Nuba Mountains, launched an appeal. The other members felt that
because of the access problems of the OLS that was not appropriate
at the time.
143. Can I just address this one to Ms Boycott? Do
you think that the appeal that your newspaper launched and the
general appeal has produced compassion fatigue and cynicism among
the general public?
(Ms Boycott) No, not a bit. It has raised
awareness. We have children in schools writing to children in
the Sudan, sending drawings to children out there trying to create
links. I think it makes people aware of the world. I think it
is absolute bong to say that people have compassion fatigue. It
is quite the contrary. We need to take care of each other. Just
being involved in the aid industry means you see what they are
up against. It is amazing what they do. It is quite wonderful.
We would be in great stook without them.
Chairman: I think that is a wonderful note
to end on because we are about to have a vote in the House of
Commons which will mean we will have to adjourn. I do not think
we have covered the ground adequately, of course, because we could
discuss this very serious issue for a much longer period and we
shall be doing so and we would like to continually hear from you
as this crisis develops and you help to cope with it. I know from
my own experience how much you do in these very difficult circumstances
and I think that it is very vital work for terribly poor and starving
people and I think you deserve our great thanks for undertaking
that work. Much of it is voluntary. Thank you all very much indeed.
We will want to keep in touch and we will want to make certain
that as far as possible the deaths and the fighting both cease
as soon as possible. Can I thank you, on behalf the Committee,
very much indeed for your help this afternoon.
| 
