VP45E3D33GRG

Nameless

I missed celeb spotting Ben Fogle at the Lewa marathon although I gather that my friend managed to get her photograph taken with him - but having the opportunity to watch Nameless at our 'Gala' dinner at the Carnivore was absolutely brilliant.  All the other musicians were good but in my opinion, Nameless was definitely the best of the bunch.

We had to wait until midnight for him to appear and do his 45 minute set with his dancers, which was timed around a rather slow charity auction (they always are tedious but necessary) and the end of the Ghana v US football match which was being screened next door.  It might of helped that 'Africa' won the game.

Anyway, Nameless is full of charisma which in a large part probably explains why he's so successful and has been listed by the Kenya Standard Newspaper as currently one of the top 100 most influential Kenyans. 

I stood in front of the stage (not too close) like a real groupie, following the actions for all his songs.  Involving the audience, asking them to mimic his dance moves and asking for a 'shy girl' to come up on stage, he created a great atmosphere even though the crowd was probably a pretty small one for him. 

I still haven't admitted to our babysitter that we went to see Nameless because I think she might be jealous.

He auctioned his sunglasses for the charity, raising 60,000/- would you believe!  When he handed them over he whipped out another pair, which must have been a bit of a blow to the successful bidder - but at least Nameless's street cred remained in tact!  What a card!...

'My glasses give me power!' he said.

Nameless was voted 'best male artist' at the 2009 MTV Africa Music Awards (MAMA).  It was great fun to see him perform live.

Lewa Marathon 2010

This is how sad I am...

I am half tempted to leap into the car tomorrow and drive 3 hours north, just to go and watch the Lewa marathon...  Why?  Not because I'm keen on running - shudder the thought.  It's because I've heard that Ben Fogle and even that Prince William will be there... I am such an incurable celebrity groupie! 

I've since found out, via a quick look at the Telegraph online that Prince W is back home after his African wanderings with his brother, so that one is looking less likely. (Prince William is patron of Tusk Trust, the charity organisation behind the Lewa Marathon).

Read more about the Lewa Marathon 2010 and Tusk Trust here: http://www.tusk.org/safaricom-marathon-2009.asp

Of course, the premise to go to Lewa would be that I am going to support my nearly or just forty year old friends who have made running the half marathon their goal this year.  What is it about the age 40 looming, that sends women dashing to their lycras?  I've watched them lose kilos and listened patiently as they tell me how time consuming their 18 kilometre runs are on Sunday mornings, but I am not the slightest bit envious.  Running alongside Ben Fogle or a prince on the other hand, well that is another matter!!

Instead I'm lucky enough to be going to the Haemophilia Society's do at the Carnivore on Saturday night, to watch bona fide Kenyan celebrities perform, Nameless, Eric Wainaina, Maia et al.  Am sure it will be far more fun than a marathon .... will let you know!

FIFA World Cup Fever in Africa

...the England football team visited a Cape Town orphanage today. "...it's heartbreaking to see their little sad faces with no hope..." said Jamaal (age 6)

My husband sent me this joke this morning! Ha ha!
 
Joking aside, World Cup Fever has certainly hit Kenya.  Suffice to say, my husband came home with a huge flatscreen TV last week and he's not even particularly a football fan!  Perfectly happy with our antique grey box that you needed glasses to see across the room ... I was horrified.  The whole family is now on a diet of bread and water until the end of the month!
 
We went out to watch the England Algeria game on Friday night at a packed bar with an even bigger screen that the one we now have at home.  More than half of the assembled crowd were supporting Algeria (whether black, white, green whatever, simply because they were an African side).  For this reason I was kind of glad that nobody scored - but what a disappointment for England!  As a rank amateur on the subject of football, my impression was that under all the fancy footwork, there is simply no substance to the England team.  The UK side evidently are overpaid and worry too much about their hair and clothes endorsements. 

Having said this, I understand that most of the World Cup matches so far have made disappointing viewing.  Perhaps other teams have struggled with the dreaded Vuvuzelas that sound like the mother of all swarming wasps.  Perhaps this noise is so deafening that critical team communication is failing to take place on the pitch.  Watching the German/Italian/British coaches' agonised faces is always amusing though.
 
The best thing about the FIFA World Cup is that it's drawing the world's attention to not just South Africa, but Africa as a whole  - and this time it's not just a flash in the pan; a coup here, a riot there, a humanitarian disaster.   What a blessed relief!  It's great to see those, French, US, English, German supporters etc. who have 'braved' Africa to watch the game.

Now the column inches on Africa are now rolling for more than one month worldwide and it's broadcasting hopefully positive feedback from the Continent for a change.  A proud moment for anybody who is from here.

One thing I have noticed; Here in Nairobi we haven't had a single power cut since the World Cup started!  Way to go KPLC (Kenya Power & Lighting)!!  Shows they can do it when they want to!!

Acacia House is now closed.

To give you a bit of background on the old aid debate I need to come clean.  Certainly a fair amount of my cynicism on aid, development and 'trying to help' was sparked by the fact that the Acacia House friends who started up a small orphanage here in Kenya, have now packed up and gone home. 

After a lot of soul searching and ground work, they eventually found a very nice, well run, larger home to place their girls.  They spent a long time settling in the children, have passed on the money they've raised and will continue to sponsor the children. Now they've left.

My friends spent their last night with us this week and walked away from the country thoroughly disillusioned by their two and a half year experience in Kenya.  I was exhausted by it too to be honest!  So sad.

They visited me often and over numerous cups of coffee I watched their initial, bubbling enthusiasm for Kenya and their noble (if a little naive) ideals be replaced by utter rejection of the place.

In the end I was stridently defending Kenya in the face of frequent sweeping statements like;
'Have you noticed, everybody lies?'
'Kenyans never help one another.  Have you ever seen anyone help anybody else in this place?'
'Nobody cares about the children.  It's all about the business.'
'Everybody here steals.'
It was horrendous.

The story all started when these two young people on a year off found themselves volunteering through an international organisation, at a horrid little orphanage in our area which was run by a corrupt pastor who was married, in his thirties. 

The pastor would keep donor money and the volunteers contributions for himself (volunteers paid 500 shillings per night to 'help' at the orphanage), instead investing in such things as a car to run as a taxi business, banks of computers to start a secretarial school.  The only problem is that he never saw the projects through - the car sat unused and the computers lay idle. 

Meanwhile the Pastor beat the kids, would not buy water for the orphanage when they frequently ran out or spend money on food (they got given scraps from the market), hoping that naive volunteers would fish into their own wallets to solve problems - which, in desperation, they often did.  Midnight prayer meetings were held at the orphange, where friends of the pastor came and sang, chanted and spoke in tongues in amongst the dormatories - terrifying the orphans.  The children themselves often got sent away (back home because they often had living family members) when they cried at night, wet the bed or turned out to be at all difficult, to be speedily, inexplicably replaced by others.

My friends got to the point where they wanted to 'save' the kids in this orphanage, and give them a different type of home.  A good experience for a change.

At the time I said, 'lovely that you want to help, but you really don't have to! Why abandon your travel plans?  It's not your responsibility.'

But they had been seduced by the kids and really wanted to help.

To cut a long story short, my friends did as they said and set up their kids home, making sure they spent a long time vetting the children to see that they really did need help and weren't just being pushed forward as orphans by existing parents. 

But there were so many problems that they didn't or couldn't forsee.  Although they worked hard to get the right documentation and permits, they got continually threatened by the local authorities who said they would shut them down (unless they paid bribes).  They suffered a terrifying armed break-in, their housestaff stole from them and they were horrified at the state of the local schools who beat the children and taught them basically nothing.  After moving house and moving schools a few times, they realised that their donor's money was increasingly being spent on rent and security, rather than the children.  The weekend before they left, good friends of theirs suffered a horrendous armed attack in their home and one is still in hospital.  It was the icing on the cake.

Eventually, the Acacia House pair realised that their help was in fact not much help at all here.  I visited the place where their four children are now housed, Hekima House, a christian organisation.  There are 60 orphans here and the place run by a retired American lady who is the grand dame.  It has a lovely garden atmosphere and the lady enthuses about the children and knows them all by name.  She has built up a good support team around her too.

'You see,' my friend said, 'here it's about the kids.  So many other people want to tell you all about the charity, or the home itself, but they never talk about the kids.  They're just not interested.'

My friends were shocked by the number of people they met along the way who had set up similar, well funded but poorly run charities in Kenya.  Foreigners who expected to come in, set something up then helicopter in and out, leaving it for the majority of the time running in local hands, often losing a lot of money to untrustworthy middle men along the way. 

I think that Acacia House was unsustainable but suffered most from lack of support by a major organisation or church (those with a mission purpose I think have the tools to cope better).  My friends, left to fend for themselves and without a personal agenda other than trying to make a small difference, got beaten by the system.  It's a sad story.

Neil's response in support of aid and development:

(Neil - sorry for making you a guest blogger - without your permission - you raise some very valid points)

Neil:

Thanks for the honour of the new post.


I work for Save the Children and live in Kenya.

My argument is based on logic backed-up by practical experience and is not just theoretical; I hope to give you some concrete examples to convince you and Anonymous.

Your main points are that there is waste and theft of the UK overseas aid, exemplified by what happens in Kenya, that this has led to a hand-out culture, and that therefore aid should be cut.

Further you go on to say in your recent comments that foreign aid is actually holding back development and never works in Africa.

I described the hand-out culture as a myth and would still challenge you and Anonymous to give one example of it. It would help to define what you mean by it; my understanding of a hand-out culture is people waiting around and dependent on the hand-out?

The reason I am so irritated by examples of this very common myth propagation as it plays to a particular view of developing, and particularly African countries, inhabited by an ignorant and feckless population, unable to stand on their own two feet despite the largesse lavished upon them by the West.

This is not what you mean and therefore you must be talking about a hand-out culture amongst the leaders. I think this cuts to the heart of our disagreement:

Who could deny that there is massive and engrained corruption? But sadly if you look at the recent one trillion shilling budget (over 8 billon UK pounds) the money spent previously by DFID (some millions of pounds) on free primary education is not sufficient for the corrupt leaders to be dependent upon it.

In the early nineties there was an aid freeze in Kenya ostensibly to push for political change, and the economy staggered on; with the politcal change (such as it is) largely coming from popular pressure. The leaders didn't bemoan the lack of opportunity to steal from DFID - just got busy with the genesis of Goldenburg, a scam so large that it dwarfed annual gross domestic product let alone aid budgets.

That may be true without making the theft of money from the primary education budgets OK? I would agree, but would like to point out a couple of things:

UK aid in this instance was based on a "sector" approach, which gives more control to the donor and less opportunity for corruption unlike "budget support" which has been used in Uganda, Rwanda, and Tanzania, with varying success, so there was an intent to contol the situation; second the flow of money was stopped when the theft became apparent - perhaps not early enough, but in sharp contrast to the cold-war era (to which your father-in-law's acquaintance may have been referring) where strategic considerations routinely outweighed any sense or control; thirdly, and most importantly, millions of Kenyan children who would othewise not have gone to school have done so.


neil said... (con't)

Its my turn to give some anecdotes: the DFID funded programme in South Sudan which has enabled the reestablishment of primary education for the first time in two generations and pioneered ways of ensuring girls go to school too; the water and sanitation work in Liberia, where UK aid has funded a consortium of NGOs with several million pounds to establish very successful water and sanitation projects; thousands of lives saved in northern Nigeria (despite the corruption) through immunisation and mother and child health programmes established using British tax payer money; the UKs support to Sierra Leone which is credited with stopping the hideous civil war, and helping it get back on its feet - even though there is still corruption there too; don't you think that children's lives saved and improved is worth the expense and the political commitment of Clare Short and others?

If you call for a cut in UK aid budgets all these sort of programmes would have to be halted; but actually you would be stopping other things too:

Quite a lot of UK aid goes via the European Union, and whatever you think of that, its humanitarian wing ECHO, finances much of the emergency work of NGOs in war zones and disasters across the world.

Some, as I mention, goes in budget support - and you would withdraw that from Rwanda, where despite increasing worries about its human rights approach, they have pretty much zero tolerance to corruption, and have stabilisd the country since the genocide.

The UN system is also a beneficiary of UK aid - and yes some of it is probably wasted and certainly paid on those high salaries you dislike - but you would be withdrawing support just when Kofi Annan has created a new-found relevance of the UN in both development and peace-building.

You would also be cutting some of the money which goes on micro-finance pojects, vocational training, ecouraging entrepreneurship, establishing youth employment programmes and a whole host of things that you would value more than those I have mentioned above.

Unfortunately you would have to scrap the assistance that DFID is giving to developing countries to help them deal with climate change effects, which let's face it, were not caused by them in the first place and are perpetuating poverty.

Last Friday (11th June) in the Standard editorial section there was a letter from the new UK Secretary of State for International Development re-affirming commitment to spend 0.7% of GNI (from 2013) on overseas aid.

He also writes: "In future, when we give money directly to governments in developing countries, we want to earmark up to five percent of the total amount to help parliaments, civil society and audit bodies to hold to account those who spend their money."

Perhaps you can agree that DFID is the best of a bad bunch if you examine some of the policies and procedures of other donors?

I think that despite the theft and the waste it is prejudiced for you to claim that all aid to Africa is ineffective - you really need to give some evidence of this; to go further and say that aid has impoverished Kenyans is nonsensical. What about the part played by the leaders who do the thieving; what about the geopolitical machinations during the post-independence period? What about the debilitating our-turn-to-eat culture that exist?

The argument of looking at waste and theft and damning the whole system and principles behind it is similar to saying that you are scandalised by the expenses that a lot of MPs have claimed and therefore you would like to get rid of them all and be ruled by an absolute monarch and their descendants; its understandable, certainly populist but why not try a bit of reform first?

DO cut UK Government Aid budgets 2!

Since this debate rages on - I am going to be really mean and publish my last comment received as a new post and my response to it and see what you think: (sorry neil).

neil said...


I dont agree with your article (see previous post) because it confuses many different types of aid or charity and the practitioners.

You move from consultants at DFID, but base your comments on benefits which are available to permanent employees, to charities, about which you simply assert that money does not reach those who need it and that it makes things worse. Both these are assumptions, born of prejudice, fuelled by the outrage built-up in your opening paragraphs with regard to some who I admit may seem over-paid, under-worked and hopelessly priveleged.

You argue that the situation is too complex to be affected by indivuals giving small amounts of money, without mentioning that most larger international non-governmental organisations work on the basis of combining those contributions into programmes, including elements of advocacy, policy change and campaigning, that have been effective, and have been proved to be effective, in saving and improving many current and future lives in many different situations.

You say that most projects last less than five years, without realising that this is not in itself a good way of measuring what impact or sustainability a particular project may have.

You seem unaware that most of UKAID is not in fact spent on the employment of practitioners - only a tiny proportion - with most going either to governments in the form of budget support or to non-governmental organisations who in turn run the programmes and are held to account for the results and the cost.

I would not deny there is waste, or that things could not be done better: an analysis of the UK funding of the free primary education in Kenya is a case in point; but your post is flawed by the polemical approach you take at the start and return to periodically throughout.

Having talked about charities you then seem to equate all of them with what you have witnessed in relation to those established by westerners in Kenya, ignoring that there are many different types, specialisations, sizes and origins of charities, including indigenous; and,one could hazard, good and bad, or more or less efficient and effective?

Lastly there is no evidence that aid has created a hand-out culture in developing nations; this is a common myth, and is a disservice to ordinary people in developing countries who I doubt would feel dependent upon foreign aid. A cursory glance at the total amount of money spent by DFID in Kenya vis a vis the overall Kenyan Government budget would tell you this.

Arguing from the particular (that people in DFID are overpaid in your opinion) to the general (that UKAID is a waste of money and should be cut) is rather missing the point.

I think that the UK Government, which has the reputation of being the best government donor on many counts (such as untying all aid so that it can be spent most effectively) should be commended for continuing to increase its UKAID budget.

By all means call for greater scrutiny, and further improvements on how aid is delivered; but please base your arguments on a more critical analysis and less personal anecdote.



3:37 PM

Africa Expat Wife said...

Hi Neil,

Thanks for your feedback.

Having been fairly open and honest about my position, I wonder, are you a Dfid employee, or involved in the aid industry or politics on a broader level?

While my blog post is admittedly peppered with anecdotes, I feel that your comment seems to be based more on theory than practise? Correct me if I'm wrong.

I will agree that attacking Dfid consultants and charities in general in Kenya is too vague an approach. Apologies for that.

However, the whole point of this piece was to draw attention to the fact that THERE IS A MAJOR PROBLEM HERE!

Since independence, the majority of Kenyans have got poorer so clearly something is not working.

On June 3rd, the local papers reported that Shs500 million earmarked for IDPs, (Kenyans left homeless by post-election violence) turns out to have been stolen by provincial administration officials and senior government officials. Looking at the comments online, ordinary Kenyans are once more outraged ... and helpless.

This story may not be directly linked to Dfid funding(the primary education fund scandal was)but it is yet another example to illustrate that the hand-out culture (and there most definitely is one!) is being vastly abused - regularly - from top to bottom.

Pilfering from government funds is made easier by aid money pouring into the country year after year, with not enough checks and balances in place. It's all too easy to milk the system and lets face it, Kenyan politicians and people in authority have got very good at it. They seem to have no qualms about stealing from the less fortunate and most steal with impunity.

Sadly, these news headlines are by no means rare. New scandals/stories of theft from public finances come to light monthly. I can hardly bear to read them.

Plus, I'd like to point out that in Kenya, NGOs are considered by many (Kenyans) as a joke, since they come and go with startling regularity and the majority acheive very little. A friend who lives in Kibera said,
'We see these big, shiny NGO vehicles coming to Kibera, there's an important man, they set up an office, then a couple of years later the office disappears and we people have seen no benefits. For us, life in Kibera just stays the same.'

To go to your last point, I did not say that people in developing nations feel dependent on foreign aid. Far from it - I think that people in developing nations feel crippled by foreign aid because it's holding back the country's development.

On the other hand, foreign investment and trade with favourable terms helps development.

The UK government throwing aid money at Kenya is a mess, so unlike you, I do not commend them for doing this continually. The money is NOT spent effectively and by all accounts has never been.

Years ago my father-in-law was told by a friend in UK government, 'we know that 85% of aid money sent to Africa goes astray - but we do it because at least some of it is getting through.' As a teacher working very hard in a Kenyan university just after independence, he was furious at this shockingly wasteful attitude.

My argument is that Claire Short and Tony Blair were wrong. A new approach is drastically needed to lift Kenya away from grand scale corruption abuses and poverty.



10:55 AM

Post a Comment



Links to this post

Create a Link



Newer Post Older Post Home

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Joe Biden's in the house!

While Obama is up to his elbows in the BP oil slick crisis, we in Kenya are all in a twitter about Joe Biden's visit.  Biden's here for three days on his way to the opening of the SA Fifa World cup and arrived last night.  Since he's the most high ranking American statesman to ever have visited Kenya - the question is; why is he coming?  The local newspapers for one, seem to be pretty hazy on his agenda. 

The party line is that he will discuss with and offer support to leaders regarding security in the region, ie. Somalia, but in fact he's probably going to look pretty hard at the implementation of reforms promised in 2008 and if previous form is anything to go by, he'll be finding the right diplomatic words to slap wrists. 

A major part of the reform agenda is to implement a new constitution.  The public referendum is due to take place in August.  Early signs were that politicians were going to play ball and unanimously give the new draft constitution their blessing, thus encouraging the public to vote it in. 

The problem is now that the big cheeses have had too long to read the small print.  Many politicians are saying they will back it in public, then privately will vote 'no'.  This is probably because the new constitution will trim their powers, cut back their numbers, reduce their pay and possibly take away their ill gotten land gains.  There are also issues over khadi courts, abortion etc. which the church and other leaders have objected to, but if the new constitution does get in, then there is no reason why these clauses cannot be amended later.  As I said before, surprise surprise, Ruto is leading the no campaign.  For the past month he's been pictured in various constituencies haranguing a rather bemused looking general public.

Since journalists have only been able to speculate over Joe Biden's visit, the newspapers have run lead stories on topics like; his security detail, high tech devices that have been imported into the country and installed at the Intercontinental Hotel and whether or not city traffic will grind to a halt (it has).

Helicoptering in your own people and equipment ergo discounting what is locally available means that, reading between the lines, there's the hint of a personal snub here.  Since American Joe arrived last night, things have got off to a poor start.  Radio presenters this morning ranted that American secret service were bossing and disrespecting high ranking Kenyan police officers.  You can just imagine the scene can't you!  Starched Uniforms v. Men in Black.  I hope Ranneberger (US Ambassador to Kenya) is not going to have a heart attack!

My question is, Joe's got 3 days in Kenya.  Once he's met with Kibaki and Raila (scheduled individual visits today), then what on earth is he going to be up to?  The plot thickens....

What is El Niño anyway?

It's still raining.  Though the rains in Kenya have admittedly eased, we still have odd nights of dashing around with buckets to place strategically under leaky roof patches.  I have also read a bit about scientists predicting a very hot summer in Europe this year.  Well they said that last year didn't they, but with all this heavy rain we've had I wondered, what exactly is El Niño? What does it mean?

I decided to do a bit of research and to be honest got more than a little confused by a lot of highly technical information concerning jet streams, hurricanes, wind directions, ocean currents and fish.  However, after wading through various websites, here's what I grasped:

What is El Niño?
The El Niño phenomenon is a warming of the eastern Pacific Ocean occurring every few years, which disrupts the weather pattern of the region and beyond. Higher sea surface temperatures pump out heat into the atmosphere causing abnormal weather patterns on each side of the Pacific and beyond. Scientists are still studying the effects of El Niño, which happen irregularly at intervals of between two and seven years. The last major El Niño on this scale took place in 1998, before that there was a big one in 1983. Over the past forty years there have been nine El Niños.

El Niño – Literal translation, from Spanish means ‘the boy’ or ‘Christ child’.
The change in sea temperature and odd weather effects were first noticed by Latin American anchovy fishermen in the 19th Century who named it after the Christ Child because it normally happened around Christmas time. They realised that when the sea temperature rose, the fish were harder to catch and it also rained a lot, so fishermen would take a break to spend more time with their families.

So what effect does El Niño have on the weather?
The effects are different all around the world. Some areas are drier or experience drought during an El Niño year, while others have more rain. India, Northern Australia, Indonesia and the Philippines are drier while East Africa and the eastern Pacific has enjoyed more rainfall.

On a global scale, there have been fewer droughts this year thanks to El Niño. In an El Niño year there tend to be more Eastern Pacific hurricanes and fewer Atlantic hurricanes. The strongest El Niño effects are felt from September to February. This 2010 El Niño is predicted to fade out during June.

So then what then is La Niña?
Literally, La Niña means ‘little girl’. The La Niña weather effects are almost the exact opposite to those of El Niño. During La Niña surface water temperatures in the Pacific cool. For instance, during La Niña, India experiences more rainfall and Kenya, much less.

What has all this got to do with global warming? Are the two linked?
Some scientists say that cooler water temperatures in the Pacific Ocean, or rather 'La Niña' conditions since 1998, have limited the effects of global warming/climate change over the past decade. Since 2010 is an El Niño year, add this to a global temperature rise of 0.7C or ‘global warming’ (and in spite of the very cold winter experienced in Europe) scientists predict that worldwide, this could be the hottest year on record ever!

Rhino Charge

I dragged the kids off to watch the Rhino Charge on Monday which this year was located at Magadi on the edge of the soda lake.  For weeks I had begged as many friends as I could find to accompany me, but they all refused with lame excuses like,
'I don't know where my camping kit is' or
'I'm going to the cinema.'
So we went alone.

Rhino Charge is the famous charity 4x4 challenge that takes place every year in the Kenyan bush and is certainly not for wimps.  I always wish that Jeremy Clarkson of 'Top Gear' fame would come and have a go with his James May and Hammond hamster buddies.  Apparently they've been asked but so far have declined.

This year the winning entrant finally triumphed after taking part with his family team for the past fifteen years!  This is our seventh and winning seems to be as illusive as ever.  Car 39 came in 14th out of 63.  Over 72 million Kenya shillings was raised for the conservation of the Aberdare rain forest.

Read more about my mini Rhino Charge and pitiful failure to find my husband in the dusty bush here:

http://www.home.co.ke/index.php/african-expat