International Development Committee Select Committees

Can I welcome everyone to what is the final meeting of the

International Development Committee of this Parliament?

And just to say briefly in this public session what

I've just said in a private session, thank all of my committee colleagues

and the committee staff, but also to thank the many,

many organisations and individuals whose evidence today

effectively, and in particular to those who have submitted to our work

We were keen as a committee still to have

today's session because the set of issues that arise from both the food

crisis and some of the broader issues around displacement and

refugees in Africa are such a crucial set of issues,

we didn't want them to have to wait until a new

committee is formed after the general election.

We have three panels of witnesses giving us evidence between

now and 11:30, and I'm delighted to welcome our first

witness, and we have four questions that we want to put to you over

I will give you a chance, when I've asked the

first question, to also introduce yourself.

Can you describe to us your personal experiences of life in

Thank you very much for inviting me to this important

meeting, and I'm very glad to be at this enquiry.

To start with, I had a very mixed feeling of leaving the

refugee camp because when we fled Somalia

during the civil war, I

really wanted, our family wanted to get

to the nearest safe haven, but

we didn't get there because we thought we would be there and go

And because I was trapped there, I was really

But then when I look back, the conflict and the

stories and the people are still undergoing threat,

and displacement, I thought I would rather stay here.

And growing up there was very difficult

because they would throw me out and I had noaccess to employment, no

freedom of movement and there was education,

some sense of security, but there was nothing beyond

Life is more than safety, life is about dignity, life is about

freedom of movement, and I could not go out.

All I knew was about the international

organisations, like other people, that was my world.

I cannot describe the whole experience in a few words.

That was what life was like, in short.

In terms of now and today, what would you say

for Somali refugees who are still living there?

What are the big concerns for them at moment?

It is really the situation has gone very,

very bad because of the critical situation, because of Kenya's demand

It has gone from bad to worse, because people have no

option now, they cannot go back to Somalia and Kenya doesn't want them.

The international humanitarian response in terms of the food

So they are in a situation where they

are sometimes some of them forced to sign up to the programme to go back,

In 2016, I met with a woman who was forced to return and when she went

back to Somalia, her home was took by other

people who were powerful in

So her husband tried to demand that, he was killed

because of that, and she was raped, she had to come back.

And she came back, Kenya said, the people who

went through the settlement programme will not be registered

The Kenyan government said, they have

to undergo a fresh individual status.

This woman was disappointed, she was displaced again, the second

And that is the situation at the moment.

People, the food distribution has gone down 50% in

And when they go back, because of the

conditions, they can't live in Somalia, they have to again end up

And they are in limbo because they're not...

So that's the kind of situation people

We are going to explore that a little bit

Thank you very much for coming this morning.

What has been the reaction of the refugees in the camp about the

And what do you think the risk and challenges are?

I know you've touched on some of what

But what do you think the risks and challenges for those

people wanting to return, or having to return, to Somalia?

The risk is that they end up in IDP camps in

Somalia because when they go back, what they promised in the programme,

the integration, which the big thing is, because integration is a whole

process after almost a quarter century, going back to a new place

where you have no livelihood, no nothing.

The risk is, because they can't find the lives they are

looking forward to, they end up being in an IDP camp, and the

situation at the camp is very bad, there's no, it is even much worse

than in Dadaab, because they have health facilities at Dadaab.

The other risk is that they decide again to

They have to walks sometimes, some of them, when

they come again, they don't find the support they need.

And they're also stopped at the border.

Because of the famine and the drought situation, it

is going from bad to bad because the situation

So, what you're saying is there's not really a realistic opportunity

When you talk to the people, they tell

you, of course, we want to go back to our country.

Because they want it, they don't want to live in that camp

They want to go when the situation is right,

There are a few of them who have connections,

still intact and their livelihoods and they have some support from the

So when they go back, they start re-establishing their lives through

their own connections, not through the integration, the support they

promised, because that is never enough, it's never realistic.

But for those, they find they can establish their lives.

But the majority of them, they can't.

So, that is just very few who can actually survive when they get back?

And the people in the IDPs, they are in a much worse

There's no education, they live in tents and

The health and sanitation is very poor.

And again, the security situation is very, very

bad because they are exposed to rape and exploitation.

They are separated from the main cities, so they live in

Do they get any aid from any other countries like Great Britain or

There are international organisations and local

organisation supported by

And they support them, but the sum they

Because these people came from camp, they don't want to go to camp.

These organisations feel like they are

supporting, but they don't see that these people are not

You cannot just say I'm supporting you because, this is not

Now you are in your home country, you

don't want to live in the same situation you are in in the camp.

Yes, there are people supporting them, but it's not enough.

It's fantastic you're here, thank you very much.

Are refugees returning to Somalia voluntarily, or

are they being coerced, do you believe?

Because it's called voluntary, yes, they are doing so on

their own, but the situation and the conditions in the Dadaab

Because the Kenyan government is really pushing them to

And because of the humanitarian support,

the overall operation, it is scaled down.

I remember when I was in Dadaab, we used to go to get

And we used to get wheat flour, and oil and a lot of things,

quantity was reduced and also the number

of times people go, now they

And everything is almost 50% reduced.

So because they don't have that, and there is

this campaign, the Somali government meeting with politicians in Kenya,

they say, they come to the camps and they talk of paradise

in Somalia, they talk of programmes put in

place, people, they don't have much information.

Because of the campaign from the government, Somali

politicians, who are under the protection of African forces and

live in very better lives, they come and tell them they have this for

People, because they don't have enough in the Dadaab and Kenya is

And also in terms of security, it's not even better.

When anything happens, the Kenyan security forces come to the camps

and beat them up and refugees feel like, we don't have any food,

we don't have security and our politicians

are telling us there is

something for them in place, they end up voluntarily, in that sense,

So, you don't feel that they are sufficiently informed?

Are you getting sufficiently informed about

Because the situation in Somalia is very fragile.

What happens is that when, for example, you are

pushed out of town and the government comes in, the information

people receive in that town, now it is under the government control.

People feel like, I don't have any good life here so I better go back

So, in just a few days, they take over that

So the information is not updated, it is not sufficient, people get

that and they end up going to that area and

they find themselves in a

What options do you think are available

Are any of them being turned into traffickers, to go elsewhere?

I know a friend, we lived together in the same camp, who was

He went to be, he allowed himself to be smuggled

because he could not go back to Somalia and there was no education,

He went all the way through Brazil, he is now, I found

him on Facebook, and he works for broadcast TV.

And he's one of the people, and he's just one example,

He came out and spoke about his predicament and

his plight, but many of them, they didn't talk about that

because they ARE still undergoing being smuggled.

Do you get a sense of where they're going, the people that are being

Many of them come through the Mediterranean Sea, and some of the

people, they are among the people who died in the sea.

And no one knows about them because they don't

talk about it, because their families are still in the camp and

they don't want to say anything about that until they get to a safe

So that's the challenge people are facing.

And the other main issue of the whole programme

and the whole agreement that is signed by Kenya and Unicef in

Somalia, the refugees are not part of that.

They are never given the opportunity to have a say, they have

very strong leadership structure within the camp elected by their own

refugees, they work voluntarily, they have meetings with

organisations, with Unicef and Kenya.

When it comes to signing this agreement that is affecting their

lives they are not part of it. So what happens is the politicians sign

this agreement and the comeback and it's been implement it like that.

They are just looking at it from, saying this is your country now

getting better, just go back. The refugees have different priorities,

different needs. Some are therefore protection, they cannot go back,

there are houses have been occupied. They are from a minority class and

because of that situation, even if Somalia is safe it is not safe for

them. There are those under the resettlement programme and they have

been going through this process for ten years and they do not want to go

back. There are no school, no functioning schools. There are

different categories and needs which are not looked into. The agreement

is signed and enforced. Thank you for coming. You are describing very

movingly the challenges of living in Dadaab, the camp. You have described

it as the third-largest city in Kenya in the past where people have

according to what you are seeing today difficulty living with

dignity. Can you give us any other examples of how difficult it is for

people to develop businesses, to live dignified lives, the obstacles

people face? Yes, people are not allowed to move out of the camp and

the food they are getting is not enough. They started their own

businesses within the camp. They get some support from the families who

are resettled with little income they established their own

businesses and the business flourished, the government in Kenya

benefits from that, they take millions in tax from the people

every year. And that money never comes back to them, it goes to

infrastructure and it's not something that is set in a policy

where people know how much they had to pay, they just come and take

whatever amount they feel like. These people, they send the money to

mobile, electronic transfer. It's much expensive, if the Kenyan

government, if they facilitated a way of going to Nairobi where they

can get the documents but now because of the issues nothing has

changed and people, the whole business collapsed because there is,

it is like Brexit, there is no certainty. So when the government

said we are causing all the businesses, the people in Nairobi

who they build relationships with your sending them goods, they said

you guys are going so they ended up having nothing. So they have their

own businesses but they are doing it in a very difficult situation.

Right, it is not dignified. It is not dignified at all. So what do you

think would be the best alternative to the camp based solution of

helping large groups of displaced people? What suggestions do you have

two best help people rebuild and continue their lives? One of the

ways they can do is because the people in Dadaab themselves have

demonstrated and shown the best way they can be supported, they said we

want to live in dignity, we want to contribute to society, we are paying

taxes. They have their own businesses, they just want to be

given freedom of movement, employment, like Uganda for example,

they are given rights to work. So they will not be a burden to Kenya.

And they are not a burden at the moment. Kenya says they are a burden

but they still get money from them. The best way is to give them

employment rights. Last year I met with one of the young

businesspeople, he is 25 now and he has his own business and he has

connections with Nairobi, he has connection with businesses as far as

Dubai. He makes furniture for weddings, so people in the camp they

come to him when they have a wedding and so he has paid a lot of tax to

the government. He said he was going to the Kenyan Department of affairs

for months to get a document for him to be able to travel to Nairobi, to

Dubai, and he said I'd not even want food, I have my own food, I can give

you money, but please fertility it for me. So people like him, if he is

given the freedom of movement and the freedom of employment he can

help himself and also go back to his country when it's right for him. So

the best way is to sit down with these people and categorise them

according to their needs. People who cannot even work because they are

very vulnerable. Some of them have protection. These people can be

given resettlement whilst those who want to work can be given a work

permit. Thousands of them who have gone through the Kenyan education

system, some have qualifications as far as degrees and college but they

don't have employment rights, they are just sitting there. The ones

like this friend of mine who is now stuck in Mexico, he has got an

education and he was never given any rights. So that's the challenge.

When I finish my high school in one of the camp is I thought I could now

work and pay and help my family but when I went to seek employment right

I was told, this education is a privilege you have got, do not talk

about anything else. I was disappointed, why was I wasting my

time going through all these years working hard to make sure I get an

education and it was sad. I end up working voluntarily at organisations

and I work all the day and I am given lets see ?50 a month and I

work throughout the month. So that was the kind of situation people are

still facing. And your situation was typical of the young people,

opportunities very difficult, very limited? Yeah. Thank you. Would you

consider Somali refugees have a voice in deciding their future? Not

really. They don't have. If they had a voice or if their voice was

listened to the would not find themselves in that situation. You

have no means of expressing your views? Yes, these meetings are held

in Nairobi and people cannot go out to there. Thank you. The committee

recently visited East Africa, Kenya, Uganda, and I think we would concur

with what you have said about the enlightened approach of Uganda

towards refugees. Is there something the government can be doing here to

make the situation better? Yes, I would say the UK Government has

leveraged to talk to Kenya and the UN in Kenya, to, I would say, let

the UK Government advocate for these people. Ask the Kenyan government to

live up to its promises of safeguarding these refugees and

giving them rights. If the Kenyan government adopts the Ugandan policy

it would make much difference in terms of security and the

development and dignity and getting a solution for these people. The

best thing to do is adopt the Ugandan refugee policy. Thank you

very much indeed. Before we move on is there anything else you would

like to add? I just want to take this opportunity to thank the UK

Government for helping the refugees worldwide and particularly Somalian

refugees. I want to speak to thank you and the half of the refugees

forgiving, putting all this energy to make sure you help find solutions

for displaced peoples, so thank you very much. A very big thank you to

you for joining us today, for your powerful evidence to us and also

your wider work and on a personal level wish you the very best of luck

for your own future. We are going to move to the second panel now but

please feel free to stay in the public gallery to listen to that

evidence if you have time. Thank you very much indeed. Thank you. I will

invite our second panel of witnesses to take to the stage.

Thank you for joining us, we will go straight into questions but please

will you answer please introduce yourself and your organisation.

Thank you for attending the committee this morning, it is

estimated at about 63 million people are currently displaced in the

world, twice as many as in 2007. How do you see displacement in Africa

fitting with the bigger global context? I can begin, I am the

deputy executive director of International rescue committee here

in the UK. I would like to begin by thanking the Prime Minister for her

announcement last week to commit to 0.7% of gross national income to aid

at this critical time. It's very much welcome and on behalf of the

humanitarian timidity it is essential that they continue to play

a leading role. With respect to your question regarding how the total

number of displaced relates to conditions specifically in East

Africa, we are continuing to see protracted displacement in terms of

the Somali refugee population now numbering some in the region but

also much more quickly south Sudanese numbers are almost the

same, about 872,000 in the region. Why is this happening? A combination

of factors, in south Sudan there have been now failed rains, it is

entirely conflict driven that we are seeing these numbers. In Somalia we

see a more complex situation of continuing impunity of operations

for terror groups causing instability, lack of foreign troops

in declining numbers they are but of course also failed rains. If you

combine that with the fact stable countries like Kenya are likely to

see the long rain fell this summer and already have over 3 million

people who are in need of humanitarian assistance that number

could go up to 4 million. We are seeing displaced people and refugees

moving to countries or internally in places where there is already severe

conditions and food insecurity is on the rise. It's the worst

concentration and one of the worst examples crisis around the world.

Thank you for inviting me. Just do conquer with what he said, I think

we have a bit of a perfect storm of new emergencies overlapping with

these protracted crises, that have not been resolved. I think the

displacement numbers are very much an indicator of that lack of

resolution. So in a context in which, the three solutions, if you

like, repatriation has been the only one that's been pursued in any

seriousness. It's meant it left the bulb, millions of people, for

decades, in protracted exile, and when you add these emergencies on

top of it, you have a deep crisis that has been allowed to evolve. In

terms of conditions facing refugees in Africa, how does that compared to

the conditions facing refugees in Europe and the Middle East? How

could we help with those conditions to improve them? I mean, I don't

like making, Paris and is, it's hard to make, and I don't know enough

about the bill ease. But I would say that matter making, Paris and is.

You have some of the purist refugees. -- comparisons. They're

not on the public radar, in the global sense. There's a danger that,

the numbers are so high. The places in which people are having to move

to places, there's very bad access to. The profile of the crisis is

buried bad. I would say these are the poorest of the brewer at the

moment. I would say conditions vary, Uganda is one of the most

progressive countries, they've taken eight and Sudanese, just come Paris.

Europe took freeing and 69,000 refugees -- comparison. They've only

got 5.4% of the appeal funded for it to respond, but it is still

providing free health care, education, write to work, a plot of

land if you want to farm it, or per refugees, was also porting their own

population in the midst of it. Meanwhile, Kenya, we've seen it hard

and its position in terms of strongly encouraging returns, and we

heard that they have done that. The EU Turkey deal as a present for why

it should also send refugees back to Somalia. It is a challenge for

others that we need to address, that conditions are buried. In South

Sudan, the last time I was there in the previous famine, people will

eating water lilies in some of the roast areas in South Sudan because

food was not reaching them. The appeal was underfunded, but conflict

and insecurity meant humanitarians when giving access, not our fear,

particularly in southern Somalia as well. Thank you. Perhaps we could

also consider the case of Burundi and Tanzania. When we were in

Tanzania last month, we were told there were 1000 refugees a day

coming over from Burundi into Tanzania. There were ten and 50,000

refugees from less than 100,000. If you could update us on that

situation -- 250,000. The situation is very severe. We did some research

recently on, to try to understand the scale and speed of that

displacement crisis. Where the level of violence within Burundi was

serious, but it seemed disproportionately the speed at

which displacement in place in many respects. I think what we've found

is a lot of those who are currently displays and are being displaced

those who previously had been living in Tanzania, had tried to repatriate

to root Burundi, but the process had failed. I think this is were Burundi

points are many lessons that can be learned. In terms of failure. I

think the way in which this process has turned to operate is buried that

people are pushed over the border, given three months of rations and

that is it. That is, clearly inadequate in this context. This

will contribute to the situation and that then led to the displacement of

the displacement of over freeing of thousand Burundi people. I think

Tanzania -- 300,000. The people who fled in the 1970s

were given large plots of land. By the 1990s, this hospitality had been

seriously degraded. People would give a much smaller amount of land.

It is important to watch what is going on there. I will just say with

the Burundi situation, the flip of that is the success story, which is

the government of Tanzania in 2008 actually offered naturalisation to

over 200,000 other refugees, they were the ones who fled in 1972. Of

that 162,000 except that the offer, and although the process did get

snarled up into politics for a while, I think that's been a real

success, because that was 132,000 people who have not been now

displaced, and they have found a durable solution. I think that is an

option around local integration, it should be considered in other

situations as well. Do you actually have up to date figures on Burundi?

Is it still 1000 a day? Has it slowed? I'm not exactly sure,. Less

people fleeing, but returning at same time. They are complex

situations, the situation in Burundi is very hard for people to read. It

is not a conflict, it's a political crisis. For people to understand the

level of danger is a really complex process. A lot of it, what we found,

relates to the fact that people are wanting, our mood pre-emptively,

particularly those caught up in 1972 1990s violence. Yes, the numbers are

high, Tanzania has talked about closing its borders. I think the

will of the Tanzania government has to be supported without a doubt,

because it has shown itself willing to take in refugees. But I think

these cams that have been closed down relatively recently and are now

being opened have not like what is needed to house people.

Nevertheless, the fact Tanzania has been so willing to accommodate a

large inflow of people is something we should highlight. The other thing

is to make sure the promises made in 2008 that surrounded that deal on

naturalisation really did come to fruition. The worst thing that can

happen is the international community doesn't come through on

those promises, because then it sets a bad precedent. You are visiting to

ships, we will help you with the local integration, but if that

doesn't happen -- we will offer you citizens and ships. Is there a food

issue there, is this a political crisis? Are we aware... In Burundi?

There is a terrible food crisis, people are starving and Burundi.

There are so few international actors on the ground. I travel

across... We understood that the UK and possibly the US and one or two

others are the only two supporters of that particular problem, because

it's largely under the radar. It is under the radar, I travelled all

over the south of the country and did not see any vehicle, there was

no presence of the international community. It is very serious and

very forgotten. Timekeeper highlighting -- thank you for

highlighting it. Do you think another is being done by the Kenyan

government, the Somali government and donors to mitigate the risk of

return? I think when we think about returns, we need to think about full

factors. Firstly, is it safe to do so? And secondly, also important to

highlight, is a dignified, are they going somewhere where they can have

a livelihood and the future? And are they properly informed when they are

doing so? We've heard from the doing so? We've heard from the

previous speaker around the challenge of information. Firstly,

it is that of the dead, despite the best efforts of my colleagues to

provide that. The situation is highly fluid and we had a tragic

story of the woman and her husband who returned. Secondly, the safety

aspect is one that is of real concern to us because the vast

majority will be returning to seven Somalia where there is a reduction

in the number of foreign troops and therefore insecurities, terror

groups operating. Combined with the increase in famine situation in

Somalia. If we look at the flip side of our day mitigating these risks,

we are at the moment strongly encouraging people in Kenya to go to

Somalia, which is a double edged sword. It is convenient politically

to do so, but we need to ask ourselves morally if it's right.

Pragmatically, if it is just going to make the problem more complex. We

have a situation where people go to Somalia, realise there is no

sustainable future, no livelihood, no dignity there and then return.

Unfortunately, returning refugees no longer have staked as if they are

Somalian. They need to begin again in the process of seeking asylum,

which means they don't have access to food distribution and services

they had when they were produced in Kenya. As a result of which we are

seeing a 40% uptake in health care services, we provide 50% of it. That

service demand is increasing by 40%. Because of unofficial returns, we

think, but also because people are stockpiling, and it's understandable

that if they moved to Kenya, to have basic medicines, paracetamol, to

return with. My absolute fear is a repetition of the scenes I saw in

2011 with people, women and children, walking down the dusty

road, mothers having with their children on rude, returning the

summer having been returned, whether voluntary or otherwise, so a

situation where they have less access to services they did in 2011

because they don't have refugee status. One child I saw in 2011 in

Dadaab was a toddler who was crying because he was so weak he couldn't

stand and didn't understand why his legs weren't working anymore. That

scene is in danger of repeating itself if we don't take seriously

what returns means in the midst of a food security crisis as well as

insecurity in Somalia. Do you think the involvement in the return

programme is consistent with its mandate, to provide international

protection and seek permanent solutions for refugees? Well, I

would say, not ready. I think the problem is they are operating in a

political space which is limited. It is in a situation where... This is

political, not humanitarian decision. This is something, it is

not unique. This has happened all over the continent, it happens in

Uganda and the Burundi refugees. I think the problem is that it is this

sort of political pressure that pushes for what is called voluntary

repatriations but is very rarely clearly voluntary on the part of

most people. It pushes for the premature process to take place. It

is politically expedient because there is a election, nothing Kenya,

it need to do what it can do stand up to the government, to make sure

it lives up to its mandate and it is clear in the 31 convention it has to

be voluntary. I think without the capacity to provide the support on

the other side of the border, it is just irresponsible. I think even

more to the point, it is going to, in the medium to long-term, is going

to lead to much, much more money that going to be needed to work with

people, re-displacement is inefficient for people's coping

mechanisms. If you displace a second time, each time you are displays,

your capacity to cope and your capability goes down considerably.

What ?110 million disbursed is 30% of the

total appeal which is funded to 46% so it's distribution. I think there

are donors making really large contributions but we need to

encourage others to step up and that's important, with the

conference is coming up, that they do so. In terms of ensuring returns

are voluntarily I think this is a partnership between donors, NGO's

and UN agencies, responsible for ensuring returns are safe and born

today but equally NGO's have an obligation to provide basic human

services that people deserve regardless of the state is whether

they are asylum seekers refugees. We need to ensure we can continue to

speak out both in Kenya and Somalia regarding the returns process. We

have seen over 20,000 volunteer to return, 308,000 Somalis in total in

Kenya, what we are concerned about is their future as well as for those

going and what we don't want to see is not a process of core version but

a process of strong encouragement which leaves them with little other

option especially when we see the situation involving Somalia. At the

world humanitarian summit the UK committed to centrality of

protection where protection civilians from harm is an objective,

do you believe the UK Government are delivering on this commitment in the

case of Somali refugees in Kenya? It's a very big question because if

we look at the refugee population it is not untypical, the vast majority

are women and children. They have more specific needs, they are

generally more vulnerable and they are in danger of being forgotten in

the wider humanitarian response. So beyond pure protection needs of

safety in camp settings it also access to other services which

increases their vulnerability. So whether its food distribution or

health care, regardless of gender or age those returning after they have

left Kenya will not have refugee status. And that might be an easier

situation for adult men but for women and children to lump them in

that same group reduces their access to all services and therefore there

is a risk of a leading to negative coping mechanisms which we have seen

in other crises. The breakdown of the family unit, women and children

not being admitted to even camp settings but to live in informal

settlements where they are more likely to be exposed to abuse.

Further more if they do return to Somalia as we have heard from the

previous speaker the danger is that they will not be able to return to

the homes they have fled from as they have been occupied and they

cannot reclaim them. We need to ensure therefore that when we think

about livelihood solutions and cash solutions, the programme funded by

DFI D, focuses on women and children and away target them, they will not

often be seen unless you choose to seen them and this is where we need

to ensure in partnership with DFID there is a strong protection focus

and I would commend the work of DFID that has been focusing on this in

some detail. Should the UK Government be supporting the return

programme and what might the most suitable alternative speed beside

repatriations? I think it comes back that it should not exist and we are

firefighting. But we need to understand the decisions which are

being made right now have a real impact on the long-term and I think

it comes back to the fact that repatriations is the only one of the

three durable solutions which has been viable. Resettlement numbers

are low and became even lower with the executive order President Trump

and local integration is very unpopular. I return to my point I

think we need to be far more creative in pushing governments to

look at local integration. In effect, if you have had a Somali

population living within your borders for well over a decade how

inefficient to have them living in a camp were security concerns grow and

all the different factors the previous panel spoke to you, all of

these factors are incredibly inefficient. Not least the fact that

they are not rights respecting of individual refugees. I think we need

to be thinking more creatively and we need to find ways, and I think

this is where the UK Government has a role to play, this needs to be a

very political conversation around what does it mean to host large

numbers of refugees and can there be ways that local integration can

operate? I think there is a real danger we focus on the camps but

actually off the radar tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of

refugees are finding their own durable solutions. But they are

doing that despite the policy context and I think if we can

realign our thinking from the grassroots up so we can find out

what refugees and host communities want? Where are they looking for

solutions? How are the managing to survive? We have heard a lot about

Uganda as a success story and I would sound a real word of caution

about that. Uganda, there are things going on there which are also

concerning. Only about 0.1% of people in the largest camp actually

have access to land and what they call settlements are still isolated

areas of land, still the back to camps. We have to be careful how we

talk about these things. The point is what we need to do is be building

in these longer terms responses. Let us not assume Somalis will be able

to go back to Somalia in the next year, maybe not in the next five

years or ten years. We don't know that right now. But to keep it open

as what has basically been as a permanent emergency is only going to

be inefficient for everyone in the short and long term. To return

can I just quickly asked, going back to your point about vulnerable

people, children, women, possibly disabled refugees, do you think

there should be special provision to ensure the security? I think in all

crises there needs to be special provisions for women and children in

particular and as an agency focusing particularly on gender specific

issues it's something we call for. Typically firstly in every

humanitarian response programming is underfunded and is often due to an

earmarked funding going elsewhere from donors. We need to think about

longer term funding for protection, not for one year but multi-year

because then there are some predictability. I think the need to

be safe spaces for women but also we need to think about psychosocial

needs for children when we think about education in these situations.

In terms of health care I think we already do a great deal in terms of

four example are a field hospital has a special unit to treat

malnutrition in children. I think on the previous point I would also say

yes, local integration is essential and we need to encourage the Kenyan

government with support from the UK to think about a comprehensive

refugee response plan that is multi-year in focus and multi-year

funded. We could say there is no ideal model, the Jordan compact than

what is being done there, Uganda, but we are working towards

recognition globally that reintegration is the durable

solution we all know but have yet to capitalise on and recognise the

benefits, both host communities and refugees. The second is of course

what the UK can personally do and to this I look to the Home Office think

about the numbers resettling in the UK. Of course we are not going to

solve this crisis through resettlement but morally we should

do more than we are doing. We were settled just over 5000 last year but

only a were some alley and 39 South Sudanese. So the numbers are very

small in relation to the crisis. Colin Firth proportion based

it would be a great signal and also a moral argument to use when Kenya

cites things like EU Turkey deal as a good reason why they should not

take Somali refugees and should return them. It's a multifaceted

solution, the last is the hardest, conflict is driving displacement,

not just ban on. South Sudan does not have a field rain yet, it's

driven by conflict yet the numbers driven by conflict yet the numbers

displaced are equal to what Somalia has seen over the last 20 years in

the space of a few years. We need to see solutions from the international

community to solve conflict in East Africa, not just Syria which is of

course equally tragic. Can I just add, I think there is a real danger

that a particular group is overlooked which is young men. There

is a real danger that you have a population of young men who are

barely vulnerable both to being recruited whether by our shebab or

other groups but also smugglers and I think it's important we keep them

on our radar. Can I ask you to expand slightly on what you were

saying about Uganda? When we were saying about Uganda? When we were

there we were told what a wonderful solution it was, every refugee had a

piece of land and they were free to integrate and get on with their

lives. But you seemed to say that was not exactly the case? Yeah, I

have been working with Sudanese refugees in Uganda since 2000 and

I've seen an enormous change. There has been progress without a doubt

and I don't want to belittle the extraordinary hospitality of the

Ugandan government right now. The speed of displacement and

willingness to accept people has been extraordinary. But there is a

lot of rhetoric at the same time and we need to be cautious for two

reasons, Uganda is only positive trajectory with its policy and that

something civil society has been pushing for four years and there is

a strong empirical basis on which this has happened. Partly related to

research done in Uganda, that's all very positive. I think the

willingness to bring refugees and the Ugandan government certainly has

caught this vision of aligning caught this vision of aligning

services for host and refugee communities but I think the problem

is in practice there are still a bit of a problem around the fact they

talk about local integration in the centre of an structure but

settlements still remain fundamentally isolated pieces of

land which were empty for a good reason before refugees were sent to

live there. They still have relatively closed economies, they

technically have freedom of movement but they have prohibitive factors

around it, maybe you cannot afford to get to the market and technically

you're also supposed to get permission as well. There are still

restrictions, it's heading in the right direction but there is a

danger Uganda suddenly becomes this perfect model with the idea that you

become a supermodel because you're slightly less ugly than everyone

else. There is a danger that it has two negative impacts, that we don't

continue to hold the government of Uganda accountable for human rights

abuses because this is a government which closed down its university for

the two months at the end of last year. Incredibly tight restrictions

on civil society in the country. And there is a danger it leads to the

argument that everything is OK in Uganda so it does not need much

support. Where is actually the situation on the west Nile right now

is chronic. The area where most of the refugees are coming over the

border is an area that is only itself recovering from conflict. A

number of rebel groups operating. And they are still reintegrating

ex-combatants, so they are still relatively marginalised and

neglected within the context. So I think with Uganda what is absolutely

crucial is civil society is engaged much more, that the local government

is engaged much more and there is a real bringing together of the

humanitarian and Helmand actors in making sure this sort of new

emergency does not a festering emergency like the previous sedan

crisis. Because a lot of those who had just come over the border were

living in Uganda before. It needs to be nuanced and there has been some

robust research done in Uganda but the research was done in a different

camp environment, not up in West Nile and it was done with the

government, not independently per se. This is being accepted with

gospel when there is much more to the case than that which is a

danger. That is very helpful and it is something we should not lose

sight of after the election, whoever is on committee. Thank you for that.

My question really is about the world humanitarian summit where

donors made commitments to support durable solutions for the displaced,

do you think there is evidence donors are delivering on these

commitments for displaced persons in East Africa and what more do you

think is needed? Do you feel the multi-year financing we have agreed

is actually reaching down onto the ground?

I would begin by saying the commitments with a funding there,

the reality is it is very much not universally applied on the ground.

So, one example is the funding for NGOs responding to the huge numbers.

It is roughly three months long. It then has to be renewed. It is barely

multi-month. This is something which needs to be looked at. In places

like Dadaab, our funding is one year, rather than multi-year. This

is a problem because it is hard to plan long-term vegetable solutions

when you've only got single year funding. We equally realise that we

have a duty to be more transparent and a friend, so we need to spell

out at two donors a vision, as well as building adaptability to our

programming. In Somalia, we might start out by saying we'll do one

thing, but we'd like to build on the flexibility to move geographically,

depending on the needs. That partnership is what is hoped-for out

of the summit, and we still would like to see. The other side 's

partnership between governments and donors, so government in the region

around developing frameworks that was coming out of the two meetings

in New York last year, but all building towards a global compact

refugees, which we are expecting to see in 2018. There is no opportunity

to take leadership in that role, there is an uncertainty over the

alliance. In that space, they're considering its funding and also its

investment in resources, how can help these countries think about

multi-year planning per refugee response. That also from the policy

side needs to be part of the solution. On the funding side, we

need to see that translate the ground. In Syria we are seeing that,

so it is possible, we just need to see it more in East Africa. And do

you think an overreliance on repatriations, even when it's not

really safe and secure to do so? Without a doubt. I think this is so

much the problem. You would never put refugees into a camp in the

first place if you thought they might stay. The whole, entire policy

approach to refugees is predicated on repatriations, from the day they

go into exile. And I think this means that the series decisions are

taken along the way that all point to that end point. But given the

and these conflicts that seem to and these conflicts that seem to

either get temporarily resolved or just continue to fester, it is

unrealistic. We need to have a massive paradigms shift in our

thinking. We need to do everything we can to bring stability to the

region and that should be a priority, but we should not make

refugee protection contingent on that happening any time soon. I

think if we stop thinking in that way, then it will make a big

difference to the responses. It will be things like longer term funding,

bringing those development axe in the beginning, it will be work and

much more closely with those communities. This is ultimately how

you capitalise on situations where there is no economic resources but

a lot of the decisions are being a lot of the decisions are being

taken that undermine that social capital, that exacerbate the low

economic situation rather than the other way round. We touched on the

EU Turkey deal. When either of you like to expand on that? Because do

support from the whole international support from the whole international

community to find a long-term, sustainable solution for Somalia

refugees who contribute to Kenya's decision to close Dadaab? You think

the EU Turkey deal actually has been helpful or not? The problem is,

refugee protection is basically predicated on burden sharing. The

problem is that with the so-called migration crisis in Europe, it blew

apart the remnants of the myth of burden sharing. As a result of that,

yes, a lot of money has been given, but at the end of the day, in terms

of actually really sharing that burden, as we said, in terms of

resettlement numbers or other aspects, it really hasn't stood up

to scrutiny. I do think that was part of the equation. For the Kenyan

government, it felt that had the moral of the ground in many

respects. I don't think it was a coincidence that timing of the

announcement to close Dadaab. It is a complex political engagement going

on. I think the numbers are so small in Europe compared to what's going

on in the ground that the difference in GDP is so enormous, it does feel

very, very unfair. I think that until there is a bit of a

realignment, that will be the case. It is definitely lowered these sort

of legitimacy and negotiating power of a lot of Western governments, I'd

say. It is exactly that, the numbers don't stack up. Europe was hosting a

percent of refugees, less developed our 84%. By having the misfortune of

neighbouring countries displays, that's not their problem. Not when

they are seeing things like the turkey EU deal, which is lessening

the burden on Europe and sending people back. Their question is,

since we are already doing many times more than countries in Europe,

why not send refugees back? That leads to broad changes in definition

of what is a safe country to allow repatriations. That is being at a

unilateral level, whether European countries declaring Afghanistan save

or Kenya declarant Somalia say. It is not the reality on the ground.

That is our fear and problem. It is also a cry for help, Celeste on but

it simply as a morally blackmailing argument. -- so let's not simply.

What is happening in Jordan and why can't we have the same? What funding

what models can we offer to make it a sustainable solution, that help

both Kenyans, 3 million who need help, as well as refugees. It we see

it as an opportunity for moral guidance, we would be in a strong

position to articulate what a modern plan looks like at country level.

How do you think much progress if any has made on the alternative

solutions? Other than the ones we talked about. The alternative to

camps, you mentioned it earlier on. Yes, I think at Geneva level,

there's enormous will and desire to implement this and to bring about

change. I think the problem is it gets snarled up in national

politics. Obviously it has to be implemented ballooning national

policy framework. That is where it often falls apart, and the problem

is, all of the the political space for foreigners to be within a

country is contracting daily, and I think this is serious. That is what

really stands against the sort of direction of travel that being so

beautifully puts in some of the International declarations and

documents. And so I think it is saying we need to have this

political discussion on opening up the space, and seeing advantages of

having other people from outside in your country on a longer-term basis.

And I think that is absolutely crucial. You talk about Uganda. What

about the campaign Kenya -- camp in Kenya? Have you got any thoughts? I

think how we organise camps is one thing alongside the urban problem

and the fact that the majority refugees around the world are in

urban settings. The camp is finding, but it is about funding. The

location, locating all Somalis in one place when the funding for

non-Somali refugees response plan is critically underfunded, it is less

than 10%. It is an issue because then you have an underfunded camp in

an underfunded response, and you're concentrating the problem there. I

think also it is still part of the same problem of, where is the

durability of that solution? As I've said, South Sudan is driven by a

critical conflict that we are seeing, where tempers and the

population have now fled the country. The nature of political

crises is that they are quite open-ended. -- 10% of the population

have now fled. We need to think about Jubal solutions. It is an

opportunity to read to Dadaab in a more effective way and maybe a

campus not the way, but that is what I would say is the point. One final

question. You mentioned about resettlement in the UK context, can

you see a bit about what the situation is in the US were

president from's approach? -- with President Trump's approach. The

number has been halved and we are seeing the residue of last year's

commitment finishing up and concerns about the next year, 2018, and what

that means. The United States has been a leader on resettlement. They

have operated a process for vetting resettle refugees, more thorough

than any other checks don't get any of these are to enter other

countries. It ensured both United States citizens and refugees can

coexist safely. They have a progressive policy which we

contribute to to employ refugees within the first 90 days. In 85% of

cases they do, and they contribute to the airfare that brought them

there, and they willingly do so to give back to the country that

settled them. It is one of the most successful examples of large-scale

resettlement, I spoke to local councils and the UK around what we

can then there. We now work with the German government in partnership to

bring some of the lessons in the US context there. President Trump's

announcement to cut numbers so dramatically is really a blow for

that 21.3 million refugee population. Only a fraction of whom

qualified to reset amends, and an even smaller fraction get to go, and

that has now the even smaller. What I would say is that when you said

that against the contributions of other countries, it is time for

Europe to step up and particularly the UK as a global humanitarian

leader, but also as a global leader in resettlement. It is an

opportunity waiting for UK leadership, so we hope they take up

the comment meant that our target of refugees every year. Canny thank you

for your evidence. That tracker can I. Our third evidence which will

focus on the impact of the food crisis.

Welcome, both of you. As per the previous two panels, we go straight

to the questioning but please do introduce yourself when you first

and a question. The owner. Good morning, thank you becoming today.

My first question is, to what extent is the current food crisis likely to

drive a new wave of displacement? Thank you very much for having ten

-- us. Maybe I can just start with Somalia.

Honestly it is well known about Somalia's existing caseload, but we

are seen as crisis is driving a new wave of displacement and the number

is staggering. It is over 500,000 since November. We are seeing very

much people moving from the real areas into urban settings. Mainly

because they've lost their livestock and crops and are going into areas

where they can seek aid and assistance. Some will join existing

settlements, others have said of new areas on the periphery of towns. I

think is one of the key things we are concerned about is a lot of

these people are sleeping out in the open, they don't have tents, summer

are under trees, the rainy season is very shortly going to be upon us,

and the need of shelter and police people to be given food and also

different items -- for these people. The number being so fluid as it is,

this was the UN figure that came out, it was the 13th of April, I saw

it when my team yesterday, that figure which was 530,000 on the 12,

it is now 590 9000. The numbers every day are increasing.

South Sudan is slightly different, other previous speakers have alluded

to the conflict there being the root of a lot of the issues so the

displacement is often due to that rather than the food situation but

when people are being asked about why they are leaving food is still a

reason but it may not be the primary reason. It's a factor but not maybe

as prominent in Somalia. In Nigeria and South Sudan they are not using

the language of the new wave of displacement but more a recognition

that displacement is a factor of an ongoing crisis. New displacement and

read as pleasant as well. The majority of displacement are caused

by the conflict with the food crisis by the conflict with the food crisis

as a secondary. Also recognising it will continue to be unpredictable so

the preparedness for new displacement in whatever form is a

critical part of managing this crisis. We heard in the previous

evidence session authorities are struggling with past waves of

refugees from civil wars, what planning has there been for what you

might call a new wave or a continuing wave of further refugees

resulting from the current food crisis? On the hall, so sedan in

particular there is a lack of capacity of the local authorities to

prepare and manage multiple displacements but we are finding

similar pattern is in Northern Nigeria clear the authorities are

just overwhelmed and unable to cope and whilst they have capacity in our

urban centres we cannot access the rule environments where a lot of the

displacement is happening. There is a concern about lack of capacity to

coordinate, to plan, and lack of capacity and resources for them to

do it. And what you are saying is people are fending for themselves on

the streets? Yeah, I think the level of vulnerability is very high and

particularly, seeing the impact particularly with high levels of

malnutrition particularly for children under five having a really

detrimental on not just their status at the moment but on their life

going forward and I think that's one of the key aspects we are trying to

address. Thank you. Famine has been declared in Unity

province in South Sudan, could you give us update perhaps? Yeah, so the

famine was a localised declaration in two counties, I think since then

there has been a massive scale up of response and it's happened in other

countries in Somalia as well. But I think the thing we are often

concerned about is there are a lot of other areas that might not have

been declared in famine but that they are very much on the edge of

that and very vulnerable and sometimes there are in analysis

blindspots that we cannot get the data and we don't know what's going

on. A lot of areas are the areas which need a lot of attention in

terms of getting in the food quickly as we can in order to save as many

lives as possible. Pitch trying to get the balance between that but

also in knowledge food security is creeping into some of the urban

areas so we were worried when we did a study recently to learn that a

high proportion, almost 70-80% of the population were supporting food

shortages and securities and frustrations with youth who are

finding a lack of employment and men who were frustrated at their

inability to provide for their families. Those growing tensions are

coming as result of that lack of food and that's something we are

conserved about. -- concerned about. We heard a figure of about 16

million people on the brink of starvation, analysis says 22.9

million currently face crisis levels of food insecurity, quite

substantial differences, do we have up-to-date data because that's

incredibly important when it comes to finding solutions. The figures

are changing all the time and different agencies will use

different methodologies to calculate the figures. At the time of the

appeal as far as I understand they used the data available to them in

terms of the areas and went with that particular figure. It might not

necessarily be the same methodology which was that a broader range of

vulnerabilities by the sounds a bit. So I think the key thing is it shows

the vast scale of the numbers and how the situation is getting worse

over time and the needs are very much outpacing our ability to

respond in a lot of these contexts. Where are the food supplies coming

from which are meeting these needs? He will be coming from a number of

sources, for example for us we partner with the world food

programme and a lot of us will be sub partners of UN agencies, getting

money from the international community or from our own personal

appeals to our supporters in terms of private funding. I think there

are a range of sources. In the past we have heard the world food

programme has been doing more to source food regionally where it is

possible, where there is surplus, are surpluses at the moment they can

source within the region or is it all coming from outside the region?

I'm afraid he would not have that information but we could find it

out. It would be interesting to know because it's an important method

they have used to ensure local food markets are not distorted by

large-scale imports, thank you. In your assessment where else is it

likely famine might be declared? The next meetings of the workshops for

South Sudan and Somalia are in the beginning of May and that's the

forum, the initial ICP forum where they will look at the analysis. It's

difficult to speculate of course before the actual data comes in, but

our expectation is that if there is another area fallen into famine we

would expect it to potentially be Somalia we are looking at. What is

the impact of declaring something is a famine versus not declaring

something that is a crisis is a famine? What is the difference in

the international community response? The ICP, the way they

define a famine is on three key indicators, food insecurity,

prevalence of malnutrition and mortality rates. There is

categorisation of 1-5. There are all sorts of challenges in collecting

the data that we recognise lack of access to data, and also around the

mortality indicator, that's the one debated a lot by the ICP at the

moment particularly because at the point by which you get mentality

data which reaches that indicator you are already in the midst of a

famine so you are already late. By the time of famine is called we

recognise we are already late and that's a shame, I missed

opportunity. But one of the things we are extremely keen on is that the

declaration of famine should be retained by the ICP, it should be

evidence based on technical indicators because it's not a term

which should be used freely, it needs to be tied to a set of

circumstances. But the reality is when it does get called of course

whilst we recognise it's too late it pushes it up the public agenda,

public awareness. We have things like the appeal, changes in donor

funding pattern is, a whole set of different discussions we can have

once the declaration has been made. But it can be difficult to have

beforehand. The system moves too slowly to declare a famine? I think

that... Famine is such a loaded word that of course it comes with

additional action once you get there. In reality all of us should

be moving quicker when there is a risk of famine and particularly

around El Nino climate pattern is, when we know there is a level of

predictability and the level of warning that comes with it and even

more so for the year which follows after. Action against hunger refers

to the situation in South Sudan as a preventable hunger catastrophe, is

that the same in all areas facing the food crisis? Much like our

colleague from IRC are analysis is these crises are driven by conflict

and they are then compounded by drought and poverty but the key

driver is conflict. Which means that they are man-made and they are

therefore preventable. Particularly that issue about early warning,

early action, a lot of analysis after the 2011 drought said that if

we want to prevent this happening again we need sustained investment

over a period of time in order to prevent it happening and yet the

response plans were underfunded between 2011-2016 and part of the

reason for the crisis now is that he did not have as much early action as

we could have done. Do you think better measures could

have been put in place to mitigate the effects of the drought? When it

comes to mitigation it hard to measure. We look back and say of

course we as an agency always feel like we could have done more. A lot

of us have been working in the area of resilience and trying to build

back people's ability to cope with different shocks and stresses with

its climate change or conflict. We have been there but when you are not

in an emergency setting those types of fundings and programmes are hard

to get resources for. DFID have been leading the charge on resilience,

they have been a donor that has been rapid image support. But a lot of

donors have not followed suit or the programmes have been quite small.

Also sometimes you then get the shocks that come to communities that

will erode some of their coping mechanisms. The work we do in

resilience is we know we cannot get rid of that particular shock, not

within our power. But we can try to build up communities abilities to

try and better cope with it the next time it comes around. So I think the

programmes we have got on the ground, we are seeing anecdotal

evidence they have indeed increased community 's ability to cope but

obviously the key thing I think we would say is as well as trying to

work on the ground and save as many lives as possible we need to keep

the long-term focus of carrying on doing those programmes into the

coming year as well. Do you think the lessons of the drought in 2011,

do you think lessons were learned and if so what lessons have been

applied in the way this has been dealt with? There has been a lot of

agonising and going through 2011 and what went well and what he could

have done better. I think one of the interesting things which came out

from 2011 was things around, people mentioned timing, the need to

respond earlier and I think this response, people have said we have

responded earlier. It might not still be early enough because 2011

it was in May that the response started and this response started in

February. There has been more analysis of the situation, trying to

gain more expertise. And also a focus on cash programming, that was

a big recommendation which came out, agencies needing to look at that not

to see that it's a panacea for all the problems, it needs to be

balanced with other interventions but it's something a lot of

agencies, we have tried to look at cash for work, cash transfers,

vouchers, enabling local economies to stay stimulated and people to

have more control over different decisions. But the thing we would

urge is that it's a bit too early to do a compare and contrast between

now and 2011 and indeed the situations are very different,

different factors at play. One is not much a blueprint that we can

look to see what is now happened but the key thing would be for us to

look as this response gains momentum that we do continue to learn the

lessons. But there are also lessons we know we haven't learned I need to

get better at. What a number beyond? 18. Sorry. Can

you tell us what your assessment of the UK Government's responsible food

crisis is? -- response to. The response plan is so woefully

underfunded, so we know there is insufficient... Everything we've

had, significant gaps in food assistance, all the basics are still

issued. There is insufficient funding, definitely. However, we

have had some positive examples. Of actions from David, which have been

recognised by others. One is the IPC, this is a critical part of

early warning for farming, and they've done their mid-term review,

which is a good thing. Funding research on nutrition early warning

has also been positive. We've also had some good examples against

hunger, in northern Nigeria and Somalia about them enabling us to

reprogram existing grounds in response to the crisis, which is

also very positive, quick decision-making. It has increased

funds. Andrey pivoting those programmes to address the crisis.

All those things have been positive, but Sarah mentions them as a

champion, which we believe is the way to make the biggest difference.

These crises are long time coming and a long time recovering, and

resilience is critical. And champion cash has been positive. I think,

overall, insufficient response by the whole international humility,

but were some very positive examples from our experiences. Is there any

one thing you think we could do better? And would make a difference?

Yes. Our analysis is that conflict is the biggest driver, so actually

solving the conflict, increasing efforts on securing a peace process

is absolutely critical for us. The second one is access, we are

affected to support those, it is hindered by a lack of access to the

populations that need our systems. That is common across all the

context. Bureaucratic impediments, whether purposeful or not, I

significant reality, they drain our resources. They prevent us from

getting to the people who need help. Lack of respect for international

humanitarian law by all actors involved is absolutely critical to

us. Privatising projection as well would be the other... Like the panel

before commented, the protection needs are massive. The lasting

impacts of lack of protection for generations to come significant as

well. If I could add, just to reiterate, the UK came out very

quickly in terms of leading the charge to get an international

response, not another thing we been appreciative of. One of the key

things we ask of the UK but the whole social committee is the

transparency of the funding and the quick dispersal of funds to get on

the ground as quick as possible so we can scale up. We have been able

to scale massively of the funding, but there is is still a gap, as

Juliet was saying. It is often that with the funding, I am speaking as a

non-partner, so we're looking at it from two angles. The transparency is

the money, new money being programmed from somewhere else?

Where is it coming from? Who is going to? New partners, existing

partners? The more that all donors can actually give that transparency

will enable better planning, to see whether gaps are per sectors,

because it will enable us to hurry better quad nation in terms of

information. Often so many figures are flying well, it is hard to know

what there is. For us to see what more we need, because Ranocchia more

is coming. That is quite key. -- because we don't know more is

coming. It is not about having stand-alone child protection

programmes but mainstreaming and integrating these into all

programmes, and seeing the vulnerabilities they have two

displacements, food insecurity and complex, and the fact that those

effects last ride through into hand-held means that is often an

area woefully neglected -- into adult heard. Can I add one more? It

was said by the previous panel. This issue of multi-year flexible

funding. Because the reality is we know in most of these crises, we

will need to be doing ongoing development, resilience programmes

on top. We will need to be running both at any one time. The reality is

our ability to plan and build partnerships, negotiate access will

be better if we can do that over a multi-year period. Also, a bit like

the example of the three month project, these are a significant

drain on our management resources. If we are spending our time securing

and reporting on short-term grounds, it means we aren't doing other

things. We have some good examples, but we need more of those examples

because we know the crisis is going to be on going beyond six, 12, 24

months, and therefore we might as well be a realistic in setting up a

robust structures and relationships and programmes that can help us deal

with it. Audrey has said that so many people died and Somalia in 2011

because of a slow response by the international community. How do you

rate the response now compared with 2011 and what has changed images

better? What has been a reason? I think when I was sitting in a

presentation where they were looking at the lessons learned from 2011,

they were talking about in order to build of the maximum response or the

need when it is hires, which is around May in Somalia, maybe July in

South Sudan, you needed therefore to have at least a two to four month

window. In the case of Somalia, this time round, it does seem we are now

within that window and being able to scale up. The key thing we are

finding is that the needs continued to outpace us in terms of our

ability to respond. It is particularly a problem this time

around because the rainy season, which we been waiting for, now

obviously is too late to impact the people in the current situation, but

ever comes now and if it comes in a very heavy quantity, you have a very

real risk of the outbreak of diseases, particularly diarrhoea,

cholera, because you have a lot of animals, dead animals lying around,

they have the risk of being drawn into the water. And where people are

now, particularly with the displacement, moving into the

confined areas, you've got very strong risks of disease, but if the

rains don't come, you've also got problems for the crops. Those

crucial things we are looking at, in terms of how they deal with it.

Timing wise, it's gone an earlier, but they need is now to sustain that

momentum and to not let up and to be able to get in and save it. But

maintaining the longer term focus, making sure we don't have a pendulum

swing just to that, but we tried to keep a broader perspective the

multi-funding as well. What effect has the crisis had on school and

education? I think it had a massive impact on children's schooling. In

South Sudan, the figure was around about over 1 million children have

lost access to education. Similar figures in Somalia. I'm sure you are

aware, in terms of the safe environment as school can provide,

not only in getting children feeding programmes and to help them in terms

of the attrition, but also having that protective learning

environment. When that is disrupted by then been put on the move, that

brings with it a lot of challenges and a lot of other people have

mentioned on the negative coping mechanisms, we worry that families

will adopt once they are on the move and children's lives are disrupted,

that could include recruitment two groups, child labour, early child

marriage. These are all things we worry will increase as children of

brought out of school. Do you think there's a lesson, strong lesson to

be learned from the approach towards the importance of education in the

Syrian refugee crisis, where we've seen a lot of effort put into that?

And the approach in the east and central African residue crisis,

where it seems education is given a very low priority by comparison?

Absolutely. We've always been quite strong are pushing for the fact

education should be considered in a mincer responses, in terms of the

disruption it provides. Yes, drawing lessons learned from other

responses, absolutely, and trying to make sure it is funded because that,

as well as child protection, the two sectors that very much drop off the

radar and have a low amount coming in. Can I thank you both for your

evidence today? And to thank the previous two panels. As Parliament

is dissolved next week, our hope is that we will ride prior to the

dissolution based on the evidence we've had today, setting out the

major concerns, both of other flu crisis and the broader displacement

situation in Africa -- both of the food crisis. We will look to publish

later prior to the dissolution. Thank you for your evidence, thank

you the bean cue today order, order.