Every year there is the usual Comic Relief and Sport Relief and everyone's bouncing around saying how great it is to get out there and lose weight or laugh for a good cause... the good cause being Terry Wogan's bank account of course. You see, every year millions are raised for both sport relief and comic relief. MILLIONS. That's millions of UK pounds that are raised. Now, I know that the pound has not been the strongest currency in recent years but it is still stronger than, say, Zimbabwe dollars. Recently, a 100 Trillion dollar Zimbabwe note went on eBay for about £20. That is probably a little more than the actual worth of the money as the currency is just that worthless.
Who wants to be a Zimbabwe Trillionaire?
So, how is it that every year we raise millions (UK currency) for charitable causes abroad and yet the next year we are still doing the same thing? And what justifies our good charity? The year following one of these epic fundraisers a celebrity is sent (presumably on an all expenses paid first class flight) to the country to see what good the money has done. Whilst walking through the shanty towns or barren landscapes they proudly pronounce that the money you helped to raise was used to buy a new blackboard, six board rubbers, 3 pens, a set of chairs and a tap for the village... I know some stationary stores are a bit of a rip off but if that's all you can buy for £29m then something is very, very wrong.
A million pounds should be an unfathomable amount of money for a village of people who probably don't earn more than the equivalent of a few pounds a month. It should really be enough to buy a selection of new homes, buildings and all the services you would expect. It should also be enough to pay the wages of a handful of teachers for a year or more. So, the hard question remains. Where the hell does the rest of the money go to?
Well, you've got administrative costs, celebrity pay packets, transport for those involved in the events, the cost of airing the show, the wages of all the people involved in shooting the programme, marketing, advertising and presumably another load of administrative and pay packets for the people involved in the charities the money goes to themselves. How much of that money actually made it to the places it was needed?
According to the BBC website which gives details of the money that was sent out, there was still quite a large amount given out, although I must admit there is still a shortfall which I can presume goes on the aforementioned activities. But still, an impressive amount apparently made it to these countries. I say apparently because we can never really know. If we are to believe these figures there is still an obvious issue. That issue is quite simply that all of the money raised is being split up and sent all over the globe. There are 49 locations in Africa alone that the money was sent to (looking at the figures from 2007's comic relief) and then various locations around the Middle East and the Caribbean. Using Africa as an example, £89,000 on average was sent to each location. Obviously, this should still a staggering amount for a small village but presumably the materials used for construction are bought at UK prices or the people building are paid UK wages because there still seems to be only small scale construction.
If the money was sent to a only a handful of locations then it could make a real and lasting difference; one which would be noticeable and perhaps inspire more people to give to charity. Alternatively -- and call me a racist for suggesting this -- wouldn't it be prudent to spend the money in the UK? Afterall, as underprivileged as kids are in Africa, there are some pretty shoddy locations here in the UK and children that really don't have any future. Not only this, but sending money abroad must be expensive in itself whereas using it in the UK would mean it's far easier to account for and wouldn't need to be transferred through various accounts before being used.
I always wonder why our country, which has substantial problems of its own, is spending so much money abroad. People may say that our problems pale in comparison to those of 3rd world nations but that really is not my concern. For example, if that money was pumped into researching diseases then potentially millions of lives would be saved over years to come whereas relatively small amounts of money dumped into a 3rd world community on a yearly basis is unlikely to make a lasting impact. Indeed, if the impact was lasting, it wouldn't have to be a yearly ordeal. Give it 5 years and the buildings bought with UK money will be dated and in need of further funds for repair and renewal.
We are never going to make a difference to 3rd World communities by throwing bits of money into the quagmire that is poverty. Celebrities like Bono who parade around these cesspits trying to 'relate to' and 'understand' the people of these nations certainly won't make a difference either.
Bono. Bow down to his superior understanding of 'poor people'.
Just imagine, you've just got in from a hard day sifting through surgical waste for cans, your legs hurt, your shack is leaking. You need a drink so you take a ten mile round walk to a tap only to discover that the water tastes suspiciously like turd. Then, you return to your shack to find some smug, rich, Irish rock star in front of a camera, crying, saying how horrible the area is and how underprivileged you are. I'd be more than a little pissed off wouldn't you? The man comes into your village, parades his wealth around and then tell the world how shit your house is. It's not exactly MTV's 'Cribs' is it?
"Hi there. Welcome to my crib. Here is my bug ridden mattress that gives me sores. These are my malaria suppositories ... that's right, these fist sized things go up my arse. Oh, and over here is the bucket I shit in. Thank you for visiting my crib."
The bottom line is we will never really understand what those people are going through and until we have the organisation and money to make a lasting difference we aren't going to be able to change anything. Would it be so wrong to spend that money fixing the UK? I don't think it would be.
But if I see Bono anywhere near my house I'll go third world on the prick.
Posts
