Oz wrote:

sw writes
Absolutely. Funny you should mention that, there's a piece in the paper
about a local charity operating in Rajasthan. Started when a local
doctor travelled out with a school group and saw just how bad things can
be in a poor agricultural area. They raised UKP40,000 the first year to
fund education, health care and women's programmes, and are now close to
UKP100,000 per year. When there was a major drought, resulting in both
food shortage and unemployment -- there's no work for ag workers if
there are no crops -- the charity mobilised money to build concrete
watertanks and construct contour bunding to catch surface water on the
fields, paying the ag workers to do the work. End result, they had money
to buy food and the improvements improved their lives and crops in the
long term. *That's* how aid should work.

Now look here!

This just has to STOP.

It simply isn't acceptable behaviour from either of us.

It lets the side down.

One should maintain standards.

I'm supporting you in another thread, and here you supported me.

It just won't do.

What will everyone think?

That we've finally got the dosage right :-)

regards
sarah


--
Waist deep, neck deep
We'll be drowning before too long
We're neck deep in the Big Muddy
And the damned fools keep yelling to push on