Skip to main content

Funding and South Asia

Have spent part of the day chasing DfID. Sadly it appears that they have hit their budgetary limits in South Asia. Perhaps the government have not told civil servants in DfID that they will match public contributions and that is the reason they are not changing their refusal to fund projects. Looking at the DfID website, however, and their fundiung of various projects it seems they just didn't feel like funding these particular projects. Or maybe the decision was made when the budget was not as big. Still the outcome seems a bit odd.

Sources from South Asia indicate that some agencies are distributing dry food when cooking water is not available and there are no cooking utensils (because they were washed away). These are the sort of things that would have been distributed if the DfID had agreed to fund the projects mentioned above.

Sri Lanka:
 Provision of plastic sheeting to families
 Provision of community tents to be used as public kitchen or clinics
• Provision of clothing material to targeted families
• Provision of cooking sets kits (one kit per family)

Activity 1: Distribute NFIs to 10,000 families including:
• Hygiene & Family Kits (each kit will include 2 bars of laundry soap; 2 bars of bathing soap; 5 toothbrush; 1 pack of toothpaste; 2 towels; 1 large mosquito net; 5 plates; 2 glasses; 2 cups; 2 spoons, 1 large mugs, sanitary towels) – with hygiene promotion.
• Kitchen Sets
• Jerry cans
• Plastic sheeting
• Water purifiers
Activity 2: Support 2,000 displaced families to return to partially damaged homes by providing reconstruction materials for home cleaning and repair.


Popular posts from this blog

Statement re false allegations from Esther Baker

Statement by John Hemming
I am pleased that the Police have now made it clear that there has been a concerted effort to promote false criminal allegations against me and that the allegations had no substance whatsoever.
I would like to thank Emily Cox, my children, Ayaz Iqbal (my Solicitor), my local lib dem team and many others who supported me through this dreadful experience. There are many worse things that happen to people, but this was a really bad experience.
It is bad enough to have false allegations made about yourself to the police, but to have a concerted campaign involving your political opponents and many others in public creates an environment in which it is reasonable to be concerned about ill founded vigilante attacks on your family and yourself. Luckily there was a more substantial lobby to the contrary as well, which included many people who were themselves real survivors of abuse, which has helped.
I am normally someone who helps other people fight injustice. …

Statement re Police investigation into Harassment and Perverting the Course of Justice.

It was recently reported that the police were not investigating the allegations of Perverting the Course of Justice that I had made. This came as a surprise to me as I had been told for some time that my allegations were to be considered once the VRR had been rejected. I have now had a very constructive meeting with Staffordshire police on Friday 29th June 2018 and the misunderstandings have been resolved. At that meeting the evidence relating to the perversion of the course of justice and the harassment campaign against my family were discussed. The police have decided to investigate both the perversion of the course of justice and also the harassment campaign. I would like to thank them for changing their decision and I accept their apology for the way in which they did that. I am also in possession of written confirmation a police force would be investigating allegations that a vulnerable witness has been harassed for trying to expose the campaign against me. I hope that the aut…

R v SUSSEX JUSTICES ex p McCARTHY [1924] 1 KB 256

I have only just found this one which I think is accurately reported below (but if it is not please give me an accurate report).


R v SUSSEX JUSTICES ex p McCARTHY [1924] 1 KB 256

November 9 1923

Editor’s comments in bold.

Here, the magistrates’ clerk retired with the bench when they were considering a charge of dangerous driving. The clerk belonged to a firm of solicitors acting in civil proceedings for the other party to the accident. It was entirely irrelevant that there had been no evidence of actual influence brought to bear on the magistrates, and the conviction was duly quashed.

It is clear that the deputy clerk was a member of the firm of solicitors engaged in the conduct of proceedings for damages against the applicant in respect of the same collision as that which gave rise to the charge that the justices were considering. It is said, and, no doubt, truly, that when that gentleman retired in the usual way with the justices, taking with him the…