Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Up to $41B in World Bank climate finance unaccounted for, Oxfam finds

oxfam.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 158 posts

Re: Up to $41B in World Bank climate finance unaccounted for, Oxfam finds

#101

Post by calibas »

mistrial9 wrote: post #21

the readers here are being "chumped" IMHO .. lots of comments fall hook, line and sinker for an obvious rage-bait. Does not the article say that these are "declared allocated" but not yet dispersed? Is this related to the multi-hundred billions pledged through the Paris Accords system that have not actually been applied to anything yet? Intelligent people here are quick to jump on a 2-dimensional puppet headline to p…

> Does not the article say that these are "declared allocated" but not yet dispersed?

Not sure where you're seeing that in the article, it doesn't use that language at all. It actually directly contradicts what you're saying in the first sentence:

"Up to $41 billion in World Bank climate finance —nearly 40 percent of all climate funds disbursed by the Bank over the past seven years— is unaccounted for due to poor record-keeping practices"

Re: Up to $41B in World Bank climate finance unaccounted for, Oxfam finds

#102

Post by MichaelZuo »

Eddy_Viscosity2 wrote: post #84
zdragnar wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's strange to me that an audit would say that there's somewhere between $23 and $41 billion missing. Audits have degrees of certainty; an opinion may be unqualified, meaning the records are spotless, qualified, meaning there are issues but the records are trustworthy, and adversarial, meaning the records are inaccurate and do not represent the actual financial status. If the records are questionable, it will usua…

> Money comes and goes without accounting meeting financial standards. That does not strictly mean that the money has been embezzled, only that the DOD and World Bank are unable to demonstrate that it hasn't been. Can you think of a better place to embezzle? Its risk-free without any accounting standards. 100% that embezzling is taking place and at a large scale.

How do you know it’s risk-free?

I’ve heard the budget battles between the Navy and Air Force can get particularly severe.

Re: Up to $41B in World Bank climate finance unaccounted for, Oxfam finds

#103

Post by pyrale »

drexlspivey wrote: post #92
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They didn't find that there was fraud. They just found that the World Bank has poor financial controls and a lack of transparency in determining where funds are spent. Of course, a lack of financial controls makes it easier for people to actually commit fraud, but the Oxfam report didn't go to that next level and look for specific evidence of fraud.

> They just found that the World Bank has poor financial controls and a lack of transparency in determining where funds are spent. You mean like a certain crypto exchange CEO that recently went to jail for it?

Pretty sure that CEO was not just bad at accounting. In fact, he was pretty good at it, since all the "mistakes" were designed to benefit him.

Re: Up to $41B in World Bank climate finance unaccounted for, Oxfam finds

#104

Post by nradov »

candiddevmike wrote: post #5

What is the Global South going to spend $4 trillion on?

Since China is apparently part of the "Global South" (despite being in the Northern hemisphere) I suppose they'll spend it on various things like coal-fired power plants, petroleum imports from Iran, condos in Vancouver, shark fin soup for Communist Party banquets, ICBMs to point at us, bribes to foreign politicians, etc.

Re: Up to $41B in World Bank climate finance unaccounted for, Oxfam finds

#105

Post by fmajid »

SideQuark wrote: post #90
javajosh wrote: post #20

I wish this was a link to the original Oxfam audit. It's strange to me that an audit would say that there's somewhere between $23 and $41 billion missing. If the audit really knew what it was doing, wouldn't it have a more precise number What is unaccounted for? That said, it's high-time for organizations like the World Bank to have fully transparent finances. Like, I should be able to go to a website and see where e…

[flagged]

The World Bank is an international organization, accountable to its shareholder governments, themselves accountable to their respective people, as all but China, Russia and Saudi Arabia are democracies.

Re: Up to $41B in World Bank climate finance unaccounted for, Oxfam finds

#107

Post by carlosjobim »

SideQuark wrote: post #90
javajosh wrote: post #20

I wish this was a link to the original Oxfam audit. It's strange to me that an audit would say that there's somewhere between $23 and $41 billion missing. If the audit really knew what it was doing, wouldn't it have a more precise number What is unaccounted for? That said, it's high-time for organizations like the World Bank to have fully transparent finances. Like, I should be able to go to a website and see where e…

[flagged]

> I’d guess you’re American based on your entitlement.

Probably. Only Americans demand accountability from governments and publicly funded international organizations. The rest of us have learned to shut up and keep our heads down, and continue to worship our masters.

Re: Up to $41B in World Bank climate finance unaccounted for, Oxfam finds

#108

Post by kylehotchkiss »

setgree wrote: post #31

That's a big number, but I'm not shocked by the error/graft, nor its source (poor accounting). A well-regarded development organization I used to work for went through a quiet reorganization in 2016 when a few million dollars came up missing. It turned out that just getting materials to rural places in Sub-Saharan Africa was really, really hard to do without graft along the way. I don't know how things ultimately res…

> getting materials to rural places in Sub-Saharan Africa was really, really hard to do without graft along the way

"Graft" shouldn't need to be an unknown monetary amount missing from a bank account, especially for something like transporting things:

* Can they wear hidden cameras/microphones to get the amounts documented?

* Are they using local transport companies and staff or are they valiantly parading their bright white Hiluxes and Range Rovers as UN type orgs are prone to do, which attracts an undue amount of attention?

At some point the transport cost becomes a fixed cost of whatever that can at least be reported back to donors. Nobody donating to this type of cause expects transport to be a small number.

Re: Up to $41B in World Bank climate finance unaccounted for, Oxfam finds

#109

Post by kylehotchkiss »

lbriner wrote: post #41
setgree wrote: post #31

That's a big number, but I'm not shocked by the error/graft, nor its source (poor accounting). A well-regarded development organization I used to work for went through a quiet reorganization in 2016 when a few million dollars came up missing. It turned out that just getting materials to rural places in Sub-Saharan Africa was really, really hard to do without graft along the way. I don't know how things ultimately res…

Deciding where to spend it is most certainly hard but accounting for it is very easy. Even if the money was $100K to Jimmy to get the stuff into Algeria, there would be some tracking and accountability. It's weird that with the sort of numbers that could lift some countries out of poverty, we can't even write something down in a spreadsheet.

> It's weird that with the sort of numbers that could lift some countries out of poverty

This is not how you end poverty. This is how you pad the pockets of whatever entity is best positioned to receive that amount. It will promptly be flown with those people to the Dubai gold market where an all-gold suit will be purchased and the rest of the country never sees a dime.

Ultimately self sufficiency needs to be obtained in a stable and scalable way and then the proceeds can distribute across the economy better.

Post reply on HN