The above comment asks for you to supply reports or evidence instead of questioning the governments lack. I believe that is the purpose of your analysis.
Offering tens of millions of dollars is like standing on a skyscraper and throwing a bag of money from it hoping the needy get a few dollars. Governments love the photo op of big cheques and lofty goals. None of them are interested in the look of adequate money to develop a prototype and the effort to ensure it meets the purpose it was designed for.
Bottom line billions of Canadian taxpayer dollars have been spent with very little to show for it.
Perhaps a good start would be to take ODA away from GAC and give it to a new, re-established CIDA. The new CIDA could be designed from the ground up, incorporating all the lessons available (not just from Canada) about administering (and accounting for) foreign aid.
And a real effort needs to be made to communicate to Canadians how this aid promotes Canadian interests. This discussion would need to set out exactly what those interests are, and how the aid supports them. Hopefully people will be able to distinguish between virtue signaling and actual interests.
If Carney is looking to reduce overall GoC expenditures, GAC should be near the top of the list. The argument that "if even a single dollar trickles through to a needy recipient then the funding is justified" is nonsense; I have no doubt that there is overlap between some initiatives; and I suspect some of the funding needlessly passes through multiple NGOs.
We should pick one country and fix it. Haiti would be a good start. Do one thing at a time and do it well. Then move on. Multi-tasking is defined as doing multiple things poorly at the same time.
Your critique may be worthy but you site no reports or evidence. Small local NGOs in these countries may indeed consider any kind of aid a lifeline. Especially educational programs for girls. Certainly, accountability and measuring outcomes is necessary but can be difficult. How measures are made and what kind of measures are significant. Sometimes raw numbers do not capture situations.
The above comment asks for you to supply reports or evidence instead of questioning the governments lack. I believe that is the purpose of your analysis.
Offering tens of millions of dollars is like standing on a skyscraper and throwing a bag of money from it hoping the needy get a few dollars. Governments love the photo op of big cheques and lofty goals. None of them are interested in the look of adequate money to develop a prototype and the effort to ensure it meets the purpose it was designed for.
Bottom line billions of Canadian taxpayer dollars have been spent with very little to show for it.
Perhaps a good start would be to take ODA away from GAC and give it to a new, re-established CIDA. The new CIDA could be designed from the ground up, incorporating all the lessons available (not just from Canada) about administering (and accounting for) foreign aid.
And a real effort needs to be made to communicate to Canadians how this aid promotes Canadian interests. This discussion would need to set out exactly what those interests are, and how the aid supports them. Hopefully people will be able to distinguish between virtue signaling and actual interests.
‘One good place to begin the overhaul might involve participating in fewer programs, but doing those few exceptionally well.’
🎯
If Carney is looking to reduce overall GoC expenditures, GAC should be near the top of the list. The argument that "if even a single dollar trickles through to a needy recipient then the funding is justified" is nonsense; I have no doubt that there is overlap between some initiatives; and I suspect some of the funding needlessly passes through multiple NGOs.
Yup. As I've written, federal money does indeed often pass through layers - and sometimes ends up in strange places: https://www.theaudit.ca/p/tracking-federal-funding-through
We should pick one country and fix it. Haiti would be a good start. Do one thing at a time and do it well. Then move on. Multi-tasking is defined as doing multiple things poorly at the same time.
Your critique may be worthy but you site no reports or evidence. Small local NGOs in these countries may indeed consider any kind of aid a lifeline. Especially educational programs for girls. Certainly, accountability and measuring outcomes is necessary but can be difficult. How measures are made and what kind of measures are significant. Sometimes raw numbers do not capture situations.
This article (https://richardpollock.substack.com/p/how-do-aid-groups-fund-terrorists) was actually the thing that pushed me to address this topic. But it's far from the only discussion I've seen - including misdirected funds going all the way back to LiveAid back in 1985 to the recent debacle of FireAid (https://www.thefp.com/p/where-did-100-million-in-la-fire).