Their defense is pretty weak. Essentially they're claiming the reason houses didn't get built was because they didn't know how to build them, or that there were land disputes. All of which are true. But that should have prevented them from spending any significant amount of money.
"I'd have rather thrown the aid in the water, said Michaud. The Canadian Embassy intervened and the $10.000 'custom fee' demanded by port autorities was later waived".
"Large tracts of land, including former sugar plantations are in the hands of a few elite families. Much of the rest is divided into small plots for farming"
The article also notes that other charities that said they would build houses were able to build thousands of houses. This suggests the land disputes claim was a made up excuse since other charities don't mention this, they just show the houses they built.
The temporary shelters shown are interesting. They are made with a few 2x4s as rafters, some tin panel roof, and press board on the outside. No water, toilet, etc. Appears to be under $500 in materials per family of several people per shelter. Press board of course in a humid rainy environment will disintegrate in a couple years, which is what happened. I wonder how many of these particular shelters can be verified that they built.
