The discussion on the above subject has been revealing so far. If the same analytical surgery is done with ROC as the financier of RCDF, it is disturbing the way this particular fund is handled. ROC's top agenda is obviously not SI development, although it is packaged as such; it is rather about its political standing and the support that it must cement with SIG. ROC will continue to spend despite how badly the fund is corrupted. ROC's "use as you wish" strategy is doing more harm than good but will they budge? Not so far.

The Paris Declaration on Aid Efficiency hold donor's accountable and responsible to the effects of their largesse on the SI and its people. On this premise ROC must have an obligation to see that the fund inflicts no undesirable effect. All donors have a responsibility to honour and ensure that they "do no harm". One way to achieve this is that all donors are using the same principles and strategies to help advance the development goals of the nation. In this case ROC's 'free for use as you wish' fund, with no plans, no obligations to hold users accountable is utterly irresponsible and inconsiderate. ROC's strategy is obviously different to EU's and AUSAids's which are more accountable and coordinated. ROC must do better than this.

Money is not everything without respect, consideration and genuine collaboration. Without these, it is evil. ROC must revisit its strategy. It is the role of SIG that this is done. But how can they do it without the eye for justice. Ordinary people are the voice of justice so speak up (action) when it matters.