Comments on: Development partnerships

By: neil robertson

neil robertson — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 01:23:31 +0000

I look forward to hearing more in due course about the coordinated support for the strategy of the National Bureau of Statistics in Tanzania. But to get
back to comparison of these two diagrams: should we be worried that there are more spots on the earlier version? Do spots reflect rainfall patterns? Is
there a drought on? And what is the state of sectoral statistical support for
the water sector in Tanzania at present? Is that an area where there might be a role for donor support and further UK input? eg Do you need buckets?
And/or nylon stockings? Or is hydrological sampling more sophisticated in the 21st Century than it was in the 1960's? Some of our universities here in Sccotland seem to use nano-technology these days to test for eg arsenic -
but how sustainable is that in a country like Tanzania? I would guess that
in the days of Julius Nyerere, testing water quality would be done at village level. Is that still the case? And are there training workshops for statisticians in village communities so that monitoring of water quality is sustainable? Or
do the NBS send samplers out into the field to test water quality at pumps?

By: Emily Poskett

Emily Poskett — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 07:25:22 +0000

Aziz - many thanks for your comment, it is good to hear views from the government side, I will alert DFID Bangladesh to your comments.

Neil - thanks for your two inputs to the debate. I am not an expert on the water sector (as I said I was just presented with this example the other day by those leading the coordination in the sector), but I dont think you need to worry about the picture in the slide show! Sanitation is integral part of the community or rural water supply and sewerage is an integral part of the commercial water supply - the point is that under the current arrangements, everything is captured as part of one overall strategy. The DPs mentioned on one of the slides are of course not complete. This slide simply shows that numerious DPs are active in the Tanzanina water sector and that progress has been made with regard to their coordination.

On the statistics side, which I am much more familiar with, the NBS welcomes the coordinated support behind their strategy, as it will help them to make progress on their priority areas instead of distorting their work programme to focus on donors favourite surveys. I will provide more details in my next post.

By: neil robertson

neil robertson — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 16:38:20 +0000

Thirty years ago in Lesotho we wouldn't have stood for any of this nonsense, of course! As the Ministry of Finance we ran the recurrent budget and the Planning Office downstairs liaised with donors. There was a bi-annual donor conference to make sure that those offering assistance stuck to the broad outlines of
the Lesotho 5-year Development Plan which was developed by
Lesotho. None of this handing governmental functions over to
ODA as it was in those days when governments governed and donors knew their place. Co-ordination on the donor side was
done by UNDP; the World Bank was seen for what it was - a
bad joke; and the only 19th Street agency we really took any notice was of course the IMF. This is called self-determination.

And eventually too Lesotho even got round to having elections!

By: Neil Robertson

Neil Robertson — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 15:33:47 +0000

Basket? What basket? This looks like a treasure chest to me?!
UK DfID is also I note firmly relegated to the periphery of the
new strategic diagram? That'll teach you to cause the total
collapse of the water supply system in Dar by privatising it!

Better luck next time ..... Puzzled too by the absence of any reference to Unesco in this account too - given that this UN
agency has a specific remit in freshwater management. Could
that perhaps reflect the low priority attached by DfID to this?

Oh and by the way: what happened to the sewage/sanitation programme between organograms? Did DfID wash its hands??!
Note too - in a UK context - that Tanzania and Ghana are two
countries receiving priority in this area from The Royal Society;
and that Scotland hosts a Unesco Centre for Water Law, Policy and Science in Dundee.

http://www.dundee.ac.uk/water/index.php

By: Mazharul Aziz

Mazharul Aziz — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 15:26:12 +0000

Dear Emily Poskett,
I would like to comment on your topics. I am experiencing same problem in my country. I do work for the Ministry of Agriculture, Bangladesh. We have different donors who are working in relation to Climate Change issue and many others are willing to take that same kind of project. But we need coordinated efforts. We do not want pilot projects but we need nationwide works.
Thanks
Aziz

By: Emily Poskett

Emily Poskett — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 12:50:18 +0000

Mary, sorry if I have made this seem complex! The point is that it is hard work for the donors, so that the amount of bureaucracy that the government has to deal with is reduced, and that means they can get on with the job of improving the lifes of the Tanzanian people. It means the advice they get from the development partners comes to them from one contact point, and hopefully helps them to make decisions in the way that is best for their people, and it means that aid money is easier to access and spend on their own priorities, rather than those chosen in London, Washington and other places. Hope this helps!

By: Mary George

Mary George — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 19:42:32 +0000

You clearly understand this better than I do. If it makes a difference to the poor people of Africa that is great.