"From UNRWA's point of view, it would be better for those states and
organizations with the power to bring the necessary pressures to bear to end
the collective punishment rather than pay UNRWA to deal with its disastrous
impact"

UNRWA responds to Gaza protests
Published yesterday (updated) 24/07/2011 14:08
http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=407732

BETHLEHEM (Ma'an) -- The UN agency for Palestinian refugees was forced to
close its offices in Gaza City last week as protesters blockaded its
entrances, angry at the slashing of UNRWA's emergency programs.

Demonstrators physically blocked the entrances of the agency's offices with
large vehicles after UNRWA removed tens of thousands of Palestinian refugees
from its food distribution list.

UNRWA spokesman Chris Gunness has said the lack of donor funds to the
agency -- and anti-UN protests on the doorstep of Israel -- directly affect
the stability of the region.

Ma'an asked Gunness for UNRWA's position on the crisis.

The protesters who closed down UNRWA’s Gaza office say they were doing this
to fight for the rights of the refugees whose assistance is being slashed.
What's your response to this?

Gunness: This protest action was entirely counter-productive. By keeping
hundreds of UNRWA staff out of their offices, the organizers were harming
the very refugees on whose behalf they claim to be protesting. The Gaza
office is the "command and control" center from which we run our programs
across the entire Gaza Strip.

We need access to our computers to service projects, to manage our
education, health, relief and social service programs. It's where the
personnel department is based for, for example, paying staff salaries, it's
where our IT department is, it's where the radio room is for security and
without these things our full programs become unsustainable very quickly.

The refugees and their representatives are naturally angry about the
slashing of emergency services and have threatened further action. How
worried is UNRWA about this?

Because of a $35 million shortfall in its emergency budget, UNRWA in Gaza
has been forced to make drastic cuts to its emergency programs. The original
emergency appeal of $300 million had already been scaled back to $150
million because of the inadequate donor response and even against this
minimum spending requirement, we are $35 million short.

The core of the $300 million emergency appeal had been for food assistance
to 600,000 people, jobs for 53,000 people, cash assistance for 300,000
abject poor (living on less than $1.6 per day) and basic assistance to
public health infrastructure. Starting in the month of July, we have been
forced to cut the jobs program from 10,000 contracts per month to 6,500
contracts and we have been forced to end our "back to school" cash
assistance of 100 NIS [$29.44] for each of more than 200,000 children in
UNRWA schools.

UNRWA is doing all it can to mobilize the support of donors. But we fear
that if the current situation continues, further cuts to our emergency
services in Gaza will be inevitable. Make no mistake, the lack of donor
funds to UNRWA is now directly affecting the stability of the Middle East
with anti-UN protests threatening to shut down UNRWA on the doorstep of
Israel at a time of already heightened instability in the region.

You are passing the buck to your donors, but who ultimately is to blame; is
it really UNRWA's donors?

The real problem is that we are asking our donors to fund emergency programs
which aim to mitigate the effects of Israel’s illegal collective punishment
of 1.5 million people. The International Committee of the Red Cross has
called the blockade a "clear breach of international law" in the face of
which there has to be transparency and accountability.

From UNRWA's point of view, it would be better for those states and
organizations with the power to bring the necessary pressures to bear to end
the collective punishment rather than pay UNRWA to deal with its disastrous
impact. We would far rather be spending our time and our donors' money on
human development, particularly in education, which does add to the
stability of this region than on emergency operations which respond to an
illegal and destabilizing collective punishment. Is it not better to end the
root cause, which is the collective punishment?

There is also deep discontent about the removal of over 100,000 people from
your food distribution lists. What is going on?

About 100,000 people have come off our food distribution lists because UNRWA
is now using a more accurate poverty assessment system to determine
eligibility for food assistance. This change in the eligibility system is
meant to ensure that UNRWA can prioritize its resources on the poorest of
the poor and avoid providing emergency poverty relief assistance to those
who are not needy.

Many business people, wealthy merchants and property owners have come off
the lists and interestingly very few people are complaining as the vast
majority realize that the new system is much fairer. In this regard, the
poverty survey represents a great improvement over the former system.

Thanks to the poverty survey UNRWA has been able to increase assistance to
the abject poor (around 300,000 refugees) by doubling their rations.

Thousands of families who were poor and destitute but were excluded from
UNRWA food assistance until now based on the previous income based system
from the PA or UNRWA will be able to receive assistance. The food
distributed to thousands of families who were not in need of assistance but
received food until now can now be given to the poorest and most destitute
refugees.

There are four categories of people who were eligible for food last round
whose coupons have not been issued this food distribution round: 14,404
families who had not applied to the poverty survey by the middle of June
despite each receiving a letter from UNRWA requesting them to apply over the
last three months if they wished to continue being considered for food
assistance; 9,251 families who applied to the poverty survey but were found
to be non poor after the social worker visit; 1,388 families classified as
abject or absolute poor by the poverty survey but failed to pick up their
rations since the beginning of the year 2011, suggesting they may be out of
Gaza; and 305 families who were found to be non poor after the second visit
(complaint) and necessary verifications.

All families listed above with the exception of the 305 families in the last
category can receive food this round upon applying for Poverty Survey, with
their final poverty to be determined after reviewing their case through the
poverty survey. If these families apply before the end of the month of July,
UNRWA will ensure that they receive their food assistance during the month
of Ramadan.

What about those families who were not eligible for food assistance under
the old system?

They are welcome to apply to the poverty survey, and 10,439 such families
have benefited until now. Their eligibility for food will be determined
after their applications are processed and many will be able to receive food
assistance in the future as a result.

Is it true that the poverty survey system can sometimes mistakenly classify
a family in the wrong poverty category?

Yes, this may happen as a result of human error during the visit or data
entry process. To remedy this, UNRWA has introduced a comprehensive
complaints system to ensure that no beneficiary family in need is wrongfully
taken off the food rolls. For many cases, this includes the review of the
system's findings by a committee of three social workers who will have the
last word on the family's poverty status.

If the family coupon was cut, where can the family find out in which
category it belongs to and when it can receive food?

At the information desk of the distribution center.