So should I be pissed off...?

...or accept it as simply one of those things that happens in a disaster relief situation, even though it really could - and should - have been avoided? Anyway, to fill you in...

Yesterday we had a visit to the YMCA from a representative of the government department TAP (Temporary Accommodation Program, I think...), set up by the Sri Lankan Prime Minister himself to oversee the numerous NGOs and their temporary shelter construction projects. And it seems he was none too impressed with the shelters being built by ADT, the small NGO I've been assisting, and so "discussions" are being had between ADT and TAP as to how to proceed - whether to continue with the current shelters with some amendments of some type, or else to scrap all that's been done so far and start from scratch!

Yep, from scratch, one of the possibilities mooted by the TAP representative, so much do ADT shelters not meet their brief and minimum requirements. So, that would be a whole lot of work done by myself, and a few other volunteers that have worked on the project, that would have all been for nowt.

Avoidable? Yep, I believe that indeed it was. For starters, the designs did not meet international relief standards in terms of size. I found this out a couple of weeks ago, when we had a brief discussion with some guys from GTZ, who are a German government organisation assisting the Sri Lankan government with the coordination of shelter construction. These specifications are available for anyone doing the most cursory search into the subject, and I would have thought essential for any NGO working in the area, even a new, small one. Now, that to me is a very fundamental - and very obvious - stuff-up that somebody should get their balls strung up for.

Secondly, the design and materials do not seem to me very unsuitable for the climate we're in. They have a tin roof, and a windowless dark coloured tarp wrapped around a metal frame, with only a small door opening. Hardly something that you would think of designing for a hot, humid country, no? Even allowing for a tin roof (due to costs, perhaps), and some form of soft wrap around wall (I have seen MSF shelters that have windows, a wider door and white walls), the addition of some form of simple roof insulation - low cost styrofoam for example, as someone from another NGO mentioned to me at some stage - would keep out the worst of the heat. Anyway, just some very fundamental design flaws it would seem.

Then there are also the concerns I've had since first assisting with the shelters with regards to the three public spaces allocated for the "camps", which in all honesty are as close or even closer to the ocean than the actual properties of the families who would supposedly be moving there. So, if you're a family to afraid to move back to your own property because of the vicinity to the ocean, are you going to want top move to an IDP (Internally Displaced Persons) camp closer to the ocean. Well, duh!

The worst thing about all this is, of course, that we are three months down the track since the tsunami hit, and people are still living in tents, and in some cases (though not locally fortunately) sheltering in schools and churches. And in a month or so we have the start of the wet season...

The shelters ADT are constructing...





...are quite similar in design to those from MSF...



...which in some ways are not quite as good as those from LEADS and EHED...





...but then they don't take nearly so long to construct, which means construction of permanent housing can begin sooner. In theory...