---

Asian Tsunami: Emergency Relief

My Lords, I congratulate the noble Lord, Lord Naseby, on securing this debate, especially as it allows us to expand on his Starred Question of last week. I agree with the noble Lord, Lord Naseby, that reconstruction is an area on which we should concentrate today. With the run-up to the G8 gaining momentum, calling for greater quantities and more effective aid, it seems particularly apt that we turn our attention to the unprecedented tsunami response five months on as a case study of what aid can do. As your Lordships have highlighted, the funds raised in response to the tsunami appeal were staggering, totalling over £300 million. With the UN Development Programme’s disaster recovery experts estimating that it will take from five to 10 years for the countries affected by the tsunami to recover fully, I am sure that every penny will be needed. I would like to echo what has been said so many times when I commend all those individuals, companies and charities who have donated and continue to work so hard in response to this natural disaster. However, I am incredibly disheartened by the reports that have been emanating from the tsunami countries. While I agree with the UN’s humanitarian coordination office that ““the tyranny of rush: trying to get things done quickly can actually put us behind in the long run””, the news that over 1,500 essential containers of humanitarian aid for victims in Indonesia—some of which have been there since January—are stranded at the region’s main port by bureaucratic bungling and missing paperwork is, in itself, a tragedy. A similar situation can be seen in Sri Lanka where a quarter of the aid shipped after the disaster is still sitting on the dockside at Colombo. I am afraid that I cannot agree with the reports mentioned by the noble Lord, Lord Roberts. That is just a small part of what charities are describing as chaos, and goes some way to explaining why the pledged money received to date is apparently achieving so little in comparison to what could be done. Admittedly, as the noble Lord, Lord Giddens, reminded us, the Asian Development Bank has spoken about a shortfall of $4 billion between pledges and moneys paid, calling for aid agencies and donor governments to improve coordination to avoid overlaps and duplications. In relation to this, can the Minister outline the plan for the release of the total funds and resources Her Majesty’s Government have pledged in response to the tsunami? However, there is a need to fight—or at least to try to limit—corruption and ensure that money is spent effectively. These latter issues are not ones that we in the West can organise for recipients. The recipient countries have to do more to help themselves if we are to see a return of momentum to this response. Local chiefs have to be persuaded not to siphon off their own shares of the aid budget, or insist that aid agencies use certain suppliers. There is also a vital need to address the fundamental disconnection between bureaucrats and reality. In Sri Lanka, new homes have been held up by a decree forbidding any rebuilding within 100 yards of the coastline, as described by the noble Earl, Lord Sandwich. I find it absurd that fishermen are being offered houses five miles inland. My sources inform me that much of the new accommodation is in 1960s tower-block style, despite the problems that we have seen in our own country regarding the effects that these can have on communities and civil society. But perhaps the story of construction of temporary shelters in Sri Lanka provides the best insight into the failings of the relief operation. With your Lordships’ patience I will outline the situation. The temporary, single-room wooden huts with tin roofs, about the size of a garden shed, despite alleged consultation with those supposed to live in them are almost universally loathed. The tin roofs turn the huts into ovens by day and sieves by night. Yet the Government persisted, despite warnings from aid agency engineers that these problems would occur. An internal memo seen by the Daily Telegraph on 28 May—as mentioned by my noble friend Lord Eden of Winton—admits that many of the shelters are substandard and will have to be upgraded, doubling work and resources to be used on a project that should have been completed. On top of this problem, many also complain that they have received only two out of five instalments of the monthly living allowance that the government promised them. In fact, it is my understanding that the majority of victims are still waiting for news of their entitlements as their cases are suspended due to the lack of relevant documents—documents, which, of course, were destroyed in the tsunami. Can the Minister inform me what steps Her Majesty’s Government are taking to offer advice and to persuade the governments of the countries hit by the tsunami that they need to look to themselves as well as to the West and to reform their systems and methods of working to overcome what may become an impasse in the recovery of their increasingly frustrated and angry people? Although this change is needed, we must not neglect the steps we can take. A report by an international team of researchers that was released at the start of this month highlights that significant human rights problems persist in areas affected by the tidal wave. Vulnerable groups, particularly women, children and migrants, are suffering from violence and exploitation. In Aceh, Indonesia, and Sri Lanka there us armed conflict. Children are forced to fight and people are living in fear. In Thailand, drought had led to a decline in agricultural production, which compounded the problems caused by the tidal wave. What is the Minister’s response to the report? What steps   are the Government planning to help to implement their recommendations for the protection of vulnerable groups, aid distribution and increased community participation? I have painted a depressing picture. However, not all is doom and gloom. As we heard from my noble friend Lord Eden, smaller charities that do not seek publicity are doing great work. Charities such as the Saga Charitable Trust are having great success at grassroots level, while many larger charities are getting stuck in paperwork. Following a strategy of filling the gaps, the Saga Charitable Trust has been setting up special groups, such as sewing circles that it provided with sewing machines. Most recently, it set up a bakery. That is aid going directly to those who need it. Not only that, it is providing people with a means to provide for themselves and get back on their feet. I commend the work that Saga is doing with what is, in comparison, a small budget, and I hope that it is emulated by others. The message that I am trying to get across is the age-old lesson that bears repeating in the run-up to the G8: no amount of aid is any good if it is not used efficiently and effectively. I repeat that to do that good governance, accountability and transparency are needed. While it is essential that donors honour the pledges they have made, and that we continue to look at the issue of trade, well-targeted, smaller amounts sometimes provide greater change for good, as in the work done by the Saga Charitable Trust, than large amounts of resources tied up in red tape. It is also essential that developing countries as a whole start taking responsibility for their own actions and holding their neighbours to account. For example, what good is the NePAD peer review mechanism if the African members fail to use it against people such as Mugabe? We need to break the cycle of all talk and no action and stir the world, not the West, to give more and to change attitudes to trade. But developing countries must reform themselves if they are ever to stand on their own two feet.