The New Times Rwanda wrote today:
Thousands of the survivors of the 1994 Genocide against the Tutsi are vulnerable, many of them elderly without relatives to look after them.
Although the fund for support of Genocide survivors (FARG) has been doing a lot to see that vulnerable Genocide survivors, widows and orphans, among others, are accorded worthwhile assistance, the help has not been sustainable in the true sense of the word.
The monthly stipend support given to a disadvantaged survivor is Rwf7,500 and is based on Vision Umurenge Programme in the framework of social protection.
Individuals, too, support these survivors from time to time, and, like with most alms, such support is never really timely. Where one needs urgent assistance, it becomes that kind of pain that leaves them reeling off a staccato of wishes.
High on the list of such wishes is always a sustainable form of support. They yearn for some form of profitable project from which they can mint regular income. But FARG is moving to grant survivors that wish by setting up long-term projects for them as one of the best ways to respond to the challenges they face.
Realising that much of its budget is accrued to meeting education needs of children of Genocide victims, and that the changing time makes it increasingly difficult to continue meeting welfare support of survivors, FARG has started establishing income-generating projects that will fetch money for supporting survivors.
FARG says among the projects include a Rwf40 million multipurpose hall being constructed in Nyamirambo Sector, Nyarugenge District, to generate income to support survivors.
FARG also has a modern brick and tile furnace which is complete in Gitambi Sector, Rusizi District and intends to put up another furnace in Mageragere Sector, Nyarugenge District, worth Rwf60 million.
These are projects that seek to empower needy survivors, make them self-reliant such that the support FARG gives them is channeled into other purposes. This is the hallmark of a progressive vision, one that must be given the attention it deserves.
Analysis by Albert Gasake
This move won’t help much, and it isn’t new. Income generation for survivors has been one of FARG’s five components since it was created in 1998, and it has produced nothing tangible to date. The problem has never been funding, as FARG seems to claim. The problem has been, and remains, a lack of transparency, deep structural incompetence and poor management of FARG itself.
Since FARG was created, the government has put more than 200 billion Rwandan francs into it, at least on paper. But where is the impact? Honestly, very little, if any, when it comes to income generation and self-reliance for survivors. Twenty-one years after the genocide, survivors are getting poorer. Many survivors still have no roof over their heads. Others, especially the elderly, are dying every day from the consequences of the genocide. Women who were raped during the genocide and infected with HIV are dying for lack of treatment and proper food. Many young survivors who dropped out of secondary school to care for their younger siblings cannot go back to their studies. Income-generation projects can work well if they are well designed and monitored. But given FARG’s weaknesses, they should be run by a separate institution, such as a microfinance organization with real expertise in project management, monitoring and evaluation for low-income communities.
It seems to me that FARG is treating the symptoms rather than the root causes of widespread poverty among survivors. Survivors’ needs should be addressed as a whole, not through isolated fixes like the one in the article above. End.
Leave a Reply