Fort Mac Wildfire Thread

[Minnie]

If that's the twaddle from Danielle Smith, she can pound sand.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by Minnie

If that's the twaddle from Danielle Smith, she can pound sand.

In an analysis done by Kate Bahen of Charity Intelligence, in the past the Red Cross only flowed through about 2 per cent of the dollars they received to local charities.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Dion

In an analysis done by Kate Bahen of Charity Intelligence, in the past the Red Cross only flowed through about 2 per cent of the dollars they received to local charities.

And yet they still gave the Red Cross a 4 star rating (their highest).


https://www.charityintelligence.ca/r...ated-charities

[Dion]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

And yet they still gave the Red Cross a 4 star rating (their highest).


https://www.charityintelligence.ca/r...ated-charities

Is it wrong to suggest that we should ask the Red Cross to give money to help local charities so they can better help those in need?

It's about finding ways to better help those in need.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Dion

Is it wrong to suggest that we should ask the Red Cross to give money to help local charities so they can better help those in need?

It's about finding ways to better help those in need.

Hang on, from what I have read the Red Cross does a good job of funneling funds to those in need.

The article by Smith reads as if they don't give out funds to people and waste or horde funds.

To me it reads as someone that has an axe to grind with the Red Cross.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

Hang on, from what I have read the Red Cross does a good job of funneling funds to those in need.

The article by Smith reads as if they don't give out funds to people and waste or horde funds.

To me it reads as someone that has an axe to grind with the Red Cross.

This is what she said....

I don’t want to take away anything from the great work that Red Cross does. In the immediate response to a crisis, they are the first ones we always turn to. They set up evacuation centres, provide cots, food and other essentials, they register evacuees on behalf of government, they are instrumental in helping to get emergency debit cards in the hands of evacuees, among many other roles. They have a well-trained and broad network of volunteers who know how to treat people with care and compassion. They usually have to continue this work on for several days, or even several weeks, and they require significant resources to do so. I have no doubt the money they spend in the immediate aftermath of the Fort McMurray fires will be money well spent.

But when Red Cross announced today that they have already received $54 million, with more money to come from matching provincial and federal grants, it is time to say they have received enough. We need to turn our attention, and our generosity, to supporting other local charities that will be needed to help rebuild the community after reentry and over the coming years.

[Burninator]

What point are you even trying to make Dion?

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Dion

This is what she said....

I don’t want to take away anything from the great work that Red Cross does. In the immediate response to a crisis, they are the first ones we always turn to. They set up evacuation centres, provide cots, food and other essentials, they register evacuees on behalf of government, they are instrumental in helping to get emergency debit cards in the hands of evacuees, among many other roles. They have a well-trained and broad network of volunteers who know how to treat people with care and compassion. They usually have to continue this work on for several days, or even several weeks, and they require significant resources to do so. I have no doubt the money they spend in the immediate aftermath of the Fort McMurray fires will be money well spent.

But when Red Cross announced today that they have already received $54 million, with more money to come from matching provincial and federal grants, it is time to say they have received enough. We need to turn our attention, and our generosity, to supporting other local charities that will be needed to help rebuild the community after reentry and over the coming years.

She also said:

It has been noted in news stories that the Red Cross still has $30 million left over from the Haiti earthquake from 5 years ago. After raising $43 million in the Southern Alberta floods, one year later they still had $15 million in the bank.

But didn't provide links for either, can you?

She clearly can add links as she link Charity Intelligence to her story.

Maybe this would have been good:

http://www.redcross.ca/haiti2010/red...t2015-5yrs.pdf


https://www.charityintelligence.ca/fort-mcmurray-fires

May 11, 2016: The Canadian Red Cross announces that it will be distributing $50 million of these donations in cash transfers to Fort McMurray evacuees. This size and speed of disbursement is unprecedented in Canadian Red Cross history. Charity Intelligence applauds this decision. It empowers each evacuee to best meet immediate needs. In disaster response, speed matters. Direct cash transfers is a proven, effective way to provide aid.

How much of Red Cross donations goes to local charities: On May 12, 2016 the Red Cross released its community grants reporting that $12.0 million supported 102 local Alberta charities in the Alberta Flood relief efforts. This represents 28% of donations. This is significantly higher than the 2% Charity Intelligence reported. Charity Intelligence appreciates the Red Cross's disclosure.

How about a follow up story, or an addendum to her story?

[Dion]

Originally Posted by Burninator

What point are you even trying to make Dion?

When the dust is settled and everything appears to be okay the news media doesn't report the numbers of people who didn't get help, fell through the cracks or just plain gave up. We had a lot of that in High River after that flood of 2013. Suicides, bankruptcy, substance abuse etc.

Local charities didn't have enough funds to help those that needed it.

[Frequitude]

Suncor is shifting their support from the Red Cross to the United Way as the disaster has shifted from response to recovery. In case anyone still wants to donate and is looking for a good recipient.

[Mean Mr. Mustard]

Originally Posted by Dion

When the dust is settled and everything appears to be okay the news media doesn't report the numbers of people who didn't get help, fell through the cracks or just plain gave up. We had a lot of that in High River after that flood of 2013. Suicides, bankruptcy, substance abuse etc.

Local charities didn't have enough funds to help those that needed it.

There is no way for local charities to ever have enough money to support everyone with everything in a crisis situation. In fact having a single centralized organization such as the Red Cross prevents there from being a significant amount of waste which can be associated with local charities, many of whom while having good intentions have extremely poor execution.

I can only speak for research done in extreme disaster response on an international level (ie post Tsunami and Haiti earthquake - both of which were magnitudes worse), but having a large charity with experience is better than having 20 smaller charities with no experience.

There has been nothing to suggest that the Red Cross has done anything but an exemplary job so far and fulfilling their mandate, which is immediate response. In the case of wild fires, now it is going to fall in large part to insurance companies to settle claims.

[Minnie]

Originally Posted by Mean Mr. Mustard

There is no way for local charities to ever have enough money to support everyone with everything in a crisis situation. In fact having a single centralized organization such as the Red Cross prevents there from being a significant amount of waste which can be associated with local charities, many of whom while having good intentions have extremely poor execution.

I can only speak for research done in extreme disaster response on an international level (ie post Tsunami and Haiti earthquake - both of which were magnitudes worse), but having a large charity with experience is better than having 20 smaller charities with no experience.

There has been nothing to suggest that the Red Cross has done anything but an exemplary job so far and fulfilling their mandate, which is immediate response. In the case of wild fires, now it is going to fall in large part to insurance companies to settle claims.

Amen.

[Reaper]

Originally Posted by agulati

Sounds more like a McDonalds promo though.

Mark Morrison represent!

[Pizza]

I'm with Dion, the Red Cross has received plenty of attention and now that we're in a rebuilding phase, I think it's time we focus on a local charity that would make a difference.

I'd love to do another wave of donations with CP

Wood Buffalo Food bank perhaps?
http://woodbuffalofoodbank.com.s178952.gridserver.com/

[TheScorpion]

In 2013, I was devastated by the floods. Our house was destroyed, and all of my possessions were lost.

The Red Cross came a week later, and we got exactly two things from them: a single wet wipe, and a band-aid. In total, the Red Cross contributed a band-aid and a wet wipe to our home restoration.

Compare that to the local charities and volunteers who contributed countless hours of hard work, food, and moral support, all quantitatively helping us towards getting our house water-free.

Three years later, the Red Cross still has yet to support us, aside from our care package. Canadians donated over $36 million to those affected by the floods, and we didn’t see a cent.

I’d be happy to provide a ton of support, as much as I possibly can, to all of those devastated by the fires. However, I really don’t think the Red Cross is the way to go.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by Mean Mr. Mustard

There is no way for local charities to ever have enough money to support everyone with everything in a crisis situation. In fact having a single centralized organization such as the Red Cross prevents there from being a significant amount of waste which can be associated with local charities, many of whom while having good intentions have extremely poor execution.

I can only speak for research done in extreme disaster response on an international level (ie post Tsunami and Haiti earthquake - both of which were magnitudes worse), but having a large charity with experience is better than having 20 smaller charities with no experience.

There has been nothing to suggest that the Red Cross has done anything but an exemplary job so far and fulfilling their mandate, which is immediate response. In the case of wild fires, now it is going to fall in large part to insurance companies to settle claims.

I don't think i've ever said they didn't do a good job with the immediate response. My concern like Danielle is that local charities get lost in the shuffle when it comes to donations and more money should be allocated in that direction.

I also understand that Danielle is not a well liked person but I do think she raised some interesting points. She was my MLA and lived here during the High River flood of 2013 and I would think she had access to documents and data that us common folk would not get to see. She also did a lot of work advocating for residents about their concerns.

Since the flood i've talked with EMT workers, people with the town and others involved and heard some very sad stories of people who didn't get the help they needed. Of course no recovery is going to run perfectly smooth, I just hope everyone learned from the flood and this recovery effort goes more smoothly.

[Mean Mr. Mustard]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

In 2013, I was devastated by the floods. Our house was destroyed, and all of my possessions were lost.

The Red Cross came a week later, and we got exactly two things from them: a single wet wipe, and a band-aid.

We received no financial aid, nothing. The Red Cross contributed a band-aid and a wet wipe to our home restoration.

Compare that to the local charities and volunteers who contributed countless hours of hard work, food, and moral support, all quantitatively helping us towards getting our house water-free.

Three years later, the Red Cross still has yet to support us, aside from our care package. Canadians donated over $36 million to those affected by the floods, and we didn’t see a cent.

I’d be happy to provide a ton of support to all of those devastated by the fires. However, I really don’t think the Red Cross is the way to go.

How far do you think that 36 million dollars goes in a disaster such as the Alberta floods? It is unfortunate that you feel as though they didn't do enough to help but when there is a large scale disaster and evacuation of tens of thousands of people, even an amount of money that may appear significant is going to be inadequate to assist everyone.

Heck according to the Red Cross' own numbers $9.9M went to home cleanup and repair. When thousands are impacted that means that not everyone can get all the help that they would like, but hopefully everyone will get what they immediately need.

[Mean Mr. Mustard]

Originally Posted by Pizza

I'm with Dion, the Red Cross has received plenty of attention and now that we're in a rebuilding phase, I think it's time we focus on a local charity that would make a difference.

I'd love to do another wave of donations with CP

Wood Buffalo Food bank perhaps?
http://woodbuffalofoodbank.com.s178952.gridserver.com/

Why not try and raise funds for, I don't know, the Calgary Food Bank?

[Dion]

Originally Posted by Mean Mr. Mustard

In the case of wild fires, now it is going to fall in large part to insurance companies to settle claims.

What if the insurance company fails to fulfill their obligations? I had neighbour a few doors down in 2013 that got sewer back up like me but had their claim rejected. He put a huge sign on his garage door to let everyone know. In fact we had numerous cases like that in High River. It was local vounteers and those from Calgary that helped people clean out their basements and in some cases rebuild. These volunteers could have done a far better job if they had some money and resources to help them out. It may not have been the responsibility of the Red Cross to help them in that manner but the money was sorely lacking.

[TheScorpion]

Originally Posted by Mean Mr. Mustard

How far do you think that 36 million dollars goes in a disaster such as the Alberta floods? It is unfortunate that you feel as though they didn't do enough to help but when there is a large scale disaster and evacuation of tens of thousands of people, even an amount of money that may appear significant is going to be inadequate to assist everyone.

Heck according to the Red Cross' own numbers $9.9M went to home cleanup and repair. When thousands are impacted that means that not everyone can get all the help that they would like, but hopefully everyone will get what they immediately need.

My house still stands vacant, to this day.

We didn’t even get anyone on the ground from the Red Cross helping out. There was no sign of their presence in our area, outside of two people going around handing out their ‘care packages’. If that’s what they spent $9.9 million on…

If they’ve improved since 2013, great - but, you’re right - 36 million isn’t a lot when 100,000 people’s homes are destroyed. So, we shouldn’t donate to the Red Cross. They’ve proven to be ineffective in times of disaster. Hey, remember Hurricane Isaac?

http://gawker.com/dont-donate-to-the...oss-1652192522

During Isaac, Red Cross supervisors ordered dozens of trucks usually deployed to deliver aid to be driven around nearly empty instead, "just to be seen," one of the drivers, Jim Dunham, recalls.

...

The volunteers "were told to drive around and look like you're giving disaster relief," Rieckenberg says. The official was anticipating a visit by Red Cross brass and wanted to impress them with the level of activity, he says.

We should instead donate to local charities who will actually directly help those in need. That’s where we got our support.