IPA smear claim replaces debate
Graham Tupper ('IPA's smear on aid dollars', AFR December 14) pursues the well-worn path of smearing rather debating.
Contrary to Tupper, the IPA's analysis of aid agencies funding anti-mining NGO in Indonesia is documented and referenced in detail (see www.ipa.org.au). The links between anti mining activist and aid agencies are hardly a secret. They have been thoroughly discussed in many sources including in documentation published by aid agencies, for example see OXFAM/Community Aid Abroad's Mining Ombudsman Report http://www.oxfam.org.au/campaigns/mining/ombudsman/2001/.
When donors become eventually aware of these actions and the harm they do to the poor and jobless, all aid agencies will suffer.
The attempts by Tupper [of the Australian Council for International Development] to cover their tracks will not hide the facts and funding will fall.
As Mr Tupper claims, the IPA does receives funding from mining firms - a total of two firms and $28,000 - which is less than 3% of our funding.
Newmont Mining (the firm in question) does not, nor never has, provided funding the IPA.
In contrast mining firms often have generous funding relationship with aid agencies with links to anti-mining activist in Indonesia. Why? It's called a 'good corporate citizenship' in some quarters and buying protection by others.