the ROME – When you want to combine humanitarian aid with the logic of profit can happen that the money allocated to fly away to end up in the pockets of a few while to lose are the recipients of the so-called “help”. And that this speaks to the long survey published in the last number of Altreconomia, in which, it is said, the article is by Francesco Shoot – the evaporation of $ 100 million, made available by the World Bank to address the public health crisis and a humanitarian of Ebola, the virus that has already caused more than 11 thousand victims, in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, a Country eight times larger than Italy in the mid-european Union, and in west Africa.
A financing mechanism distorted. This money was promised by the former president of the bank, Jim Yong Kim. Promise punctually complied with, he stresses Shoot – the funds were disbursed through the financial mechanism to be distorted, so those resources have never turned in a contribution in favour of the affected populations, but rather in prizes to private investors”. The reason for all this lies in the mechanism of the “Pandemic emergency financing facility (Pef), a financial instrument created in 2016 by the World Bank “to raise private funds to use in cases of emergency related to the outbreak of pandemics”.
The funds used with logic assicuratica . It is the case, however, that – at least so far – is that those 100 million dollars that is never arrived at the destination, to support the Country in the heart of Africa, or other countries affected by the epidemic. “To understand how this was possible, and writes Shoot on Altreconomia – it is necessary to understand the mechanism at the base of the Pef, which follows the logic of insurance: a person pay every year a prize to an insurance policy in exchange for a refund to cover the expenses caused by a given event. In the case of the Pef insured are the World Bank – stated in the survey – and two donor nations, Japan and Germany, the insurers are private investors, and the event is the outbreak of an epidemic. In other words, the private investors, through the purchase of bonds, they undertake to provide economic aid to Countries affected by an outbreak. In exchange they receive each year an award, funded by Japan, Germany and the World Bank, to compensate for the risk incurred”.
Constraints restrictive to investors, not beneficiaries . It is a mechanism, which are in the dance up to 425 million dollars to cover the risk of epidemics, such as Ebola, Coronavirus and other infections. However, if, by the expiry of July 2020 there will be a need for humanitarian interventions to support populations affected by the virus, anyone who has invested will again have back his money, of course, with the addition of accrued interest. To explain the device to Altreconomia is Domenico Villano, a collaborator of the Foundation for Ethical Finance. “And it is on this point – she still writes Shoot – which are focusing many of the criticisms addressed to the Pef. In the case of Ebola, the criteria for releasing the payment, require that they spent at least 12 weeks from the beginning of the epidemic, and that this has caused at least 250 deaths. The problem is that the deaths should be spread out in more than one Country and each needs to record at least 20”.
so Far paid only the inestitori. In the case of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, which has had a number of cases higher than the minimum required to trigger the emergency economic help have not yet arrived. In fact, according to the mechanism of Pef , 45 million dollars would have already been due, compared with 250 victims; the other 90 million for 750 victims and 150 million for 2,500 died as a result of the virus. But that wasn’t the case. So far – you learn from Altreconomia – “were paid only for awards to private investors, amounting to $ 114 million”.
The debt pandemic”. The call like this: “bonds pandemic”. N there are two categories: there is a covers patolgie, such as the flu, and earn who invests 6.5% on the number allocated; the other, however, cover much more serious diseases, such as Ebola, which yielded up to 11%. To denounce all this is a former consultant to the same World Bank, Olga Jones. “To make the securities attractive to private investors – returns the current investigation of Shoot – means to draw them in such a way as to make difficult the payment of the loan, and then the loss of their investments”.
The business of bonds the catastrophe”. Up to now, the sale of the bonds has brought into the coffers of the World Bank 320 million, 225 of which with a yield of 6.5%, and 95 intended for Ebola, and then to 11%. The investigation of Altreconomia is to know that “most of the companies that have invested on ‘Ebola bond’, about 83% are european. It is pension funds, management companies, savings and investors specialised in the purchase of bonds of this type, more commonly known as ‘bonds catastrophe’ ”.
The biggest investors in epidemics and cataclysms. Among the most faithful supporters of these investments – according to the data provided by the company analysis Refinitiv to Altreconomia – “the investment company, scottish Baillie Gifford is one of the main holders of the Ebola bond, thanks to the 6.5 million euro placed”. Immediately after, with 4 million, “is the u.s. Pioneer Investment Management, acquired in 2018 from the French Amundi is the largest asset management companies in european, controlled by Crédit Agricole”.
“The Republic will fight always in defense of the freedom of information, to its readers and to all those who have at heart the principles of democracy and civil coexistence”
Carlo Verdelli SUBSCRIBERS TO REPUBLIC © Reproduction reserved Today on the Siege to Europe Greece, a wall against the in-migrants to the blackmail of The Sultan: the other three billion to stop the wave Bonino: “Europe has failed the migrants and has given Erdogan the weapon of blackmail” Europe between virus and migrants: two crises, the same failure
the Republic
