Stravinsky's Sizzlin' Shack

Hi Kevin,

I was delighted to be on BBC World Have Your Say last Wednesday, however I was very disappointed that I was only given less than 90 seconds to highlight the aid problems in Java. I believe that the focus of your request was that I'd be given reasonable time within a 15-20 minute window to discuss the logistical/political barriers affected aid ops in Java, however, I was made to hand on for over 20 minutes and the presenter just introduced me to the programme/discussion about 5 minutes towards it's end.

Secondly why does World Have Your Say try to fit in many speakers than it can manage? I really don't understand why I was called on, if it was to hear my out observations or relay what aid organizations or victims on the ground were experiencing, then you should have at the least given me 5 minutes, which your team failed to do. In the 60 seconds of time that I was given, or probably less, the audience listening in wouldn't have been able to obtain the real scale of the disaster response.

Thirdly, you told me that a rep from a local aid agency in Indo would be on the session as well, just who exactly was the aid agency that you had on? Let me give you some background here. Within hours of the tsunami hitting Sri Lanka in 2004, I was on the ground as a relief volunteer with the UNDP and the CHA (Consortium of Humanitarian Agencies). The CHA was in effect way before the tsunami, and within about 3 weeks of post-tsunami there was a national order in place which prevented any more aid agencies from springing up. Throughout the entire 9 months while I worked on post-tsunami relief and rehab projects in Sri Lanka, never have I heard of the aid agency that you had on Wednesday's programme.

Considering that the agency's rep mentioned that his agency was formed in Sri Lanka, I've checked up with the folks at CHA and they had no records on the agency. I'd just like to say that it takes me at least 3 months to study how an aid agency operates, up to 6 months to evaluate their transparency of ops before I endorse it, by putting on an aid agency which one has never even heard of let alone not being involved with the disaster scene in Indo raises issues of credibility and the agency's transparency, both of which were visible during the on -air session. Seems like Anu Anand was trying to plug in an aid agency and have others involved with on the ground efforts indirectly endorse the agency.

The aid agency that you had on air hadn't even a clue of what was going on in Indo, he was just on about the tsunami and katrina... Kevin, it wasn't about donor fatigue, I know you guys have got it all wrong, it's about governmental confusion during an aid response. In Indo, I've seen that the international community have all generously given and keep giving, it's the local govt there that have placed in road blocks and thus, the aid doesn't get through. Usually it's the UN who screws up in the field, this time it was a government screw-up, the search and rescue/aid teams I've been talking to and the survivors we've been in touch with reveal a lot more than donor fatigue -- the theme of your Wednesday's show! You could've easily touched base with the OXFAM crew in Java or even Save The Children UK, and have them on the show instead of having an unknown agency who hadn't the slightest idea of the situation in indo.

And this isn't the first time it's happened to me, the BBC have screwed up previously as well during the first week of the Tsunami where they quoted me all wrong on a news channel in Thailand, I've come to expect this of MSM! However, I expected better from your programme Kevin.