           WORLD BLIND UNION EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETS
                          IN AUSTRALIA
                       by Kenneth Jernigan

     As President of the North America/Caribbean Region, I am one
of the officers of the World Blind Union and a member of its
executive committee. The officers usually meet twice a year, and
the executive committee meets at least once in the interim
between the quadrennial conventions. Such a meeting of officers
and executive committee occurred in Melbourne, Australia, in late
January of this year, and Mrs. Jernigan and I attended.
     We left Dulles Airport on the evening of January 20, and I
approached the flight with my usual misgivings. As most of those
who have even a casual acquaintance with me know, I have a real
fear of flying. It wasn't always like that. In the 1950's I flew
more than a million miles and enjoyed every minute of it. I did,
that is, until the day I had the misfortune of being on a plane
that caught fire on takeoff. We made it back to the airport
without mishap, but just a few days later, I was coming out of
Reno when one of the two engines on the plane didn't develop
power, and we almost crashed. That did it. I felt like a gun-shy
dog, and I haven't changed since. But there are times when I
simply have to fly--so I do it.
     But back to the Melbourne trip. Because of the price of
tickets, we went the long way 'round. We flew from Dulles seven
hours nonstop to Frankfurt, Germany--and then after a two-hour
wait, twelve more hours nonstop to Singapore. There was another
two-hour wait, and then eight more hours nonstop to Melbourne.
When you consider that Melbourne is sixteen hours ahead of
Baltimore and that the trip took more than thirty hours, you can
see why we had to unscramble our days and nights once we got
there. Actually we weren't as tired as we had expected to be. 
     I think I can best summarize the Melbourne experience by
dividing it into four categories: the meeting of the World Blind
Union officers and executive committee, my visits to agencies
doing work with the blind, my contacts with local blind people,
and what you might call extracurricular activities. Let's take
first things first and deal with the WBU.
     The meetings were held at the facilities of the RVIB (Royal
Victorian Institute for the Blind), one of the two principal
agencies doing work with the blind in the State of Victoria. WBU
president David Blyth is an employee of RVIB, heading up its
division of employment services, and he and the rest of the RVIB
staff exerted themselves mightily to see that all of us were
comfortable and well-treated.
     The meetings were about as inspiring as such things usually
are, but there were ebbs and flows. As far as I am concerned, two
events stand out. At the beginning I should say that I am
probably in the minority in putting these two items at the top of
the list. The first dealt with some of the countries which were
formerly part of the Soviet Union, and the second had to do with
the relations between the WBU and the International Disability
Foundation.
     Several of the former Soviet Republics (those located in
Central Asia) had applied for membership in the WBU, and the
question of what region they should join was being considered.
The World Blind Union is divided into seven regions: Africa,
Asia, East Asia/Pacific, Europe, Latin America, Middle East, and
North America/Caribbean. Since the former Soviet Republics under
discussion are clearly in Asia, I wondered what we were talking
about. I was quickly enlightened.
     I was told that since they had formerly been part of the
Soviet Union, and since the Soviet Union had been part of Europe,
the Republics in question might feel more comfortable being part
of the European Blind Union. When I got the drift of the argument
and recovered from the shock, I suggested that perhaps the United
States should also be part of the European Blind Union. After
all, we were formerly colonies of England. And maybe we could
also add Canada, Australia, and a sizable portion of Asia--not to
mention most of Africa and the Middle East. Of course, we mustn't
forget Latin America, which belonged to Spain--except for Brazil,
which belonged to Portugal. My humor was not appreciated, nor was
the logic lurking beneath it.
     After some discussion the question was postponed for later
decision, but the matter points up a problem which bedevils the
World Blind Union and which will not go away. There is a serious
imbalance in WBU representation. Of the somewhat more than 300
votes, Europe has 120. North America/Caribbean has 12, and Asia
(with its billions of people) has fewer than 100. The other
regions are similarly under-represented. When I called attention
to these statistics, I was told that I should not be concerned
since Europe does not vote as a block. Perhaps--but I was neither
comforted nor convinced. The fact that the European leaders
apparently see no problem or injustice in this situation does not
bode well for the future. In Cairo the WBU president (a European)
demonstrated that Europe has enough votes to prevent any change
in the constitution regarding ratio of delegates. Even so, the
WBU is a voluntary organization, and it is questionable whether
the rest of the world will forever tolerate the current skewed
voting pattern. There are twelve officers of the World Blind
Union. Four of these (one-third) are European. No, Europe does
not always vote as a block. It would be surprising if it did--but
it manages.
     The issue concerning the International Disability Foundation
was more immediate and equally basic. From what I can gather, the
International Disability Foundation (IDF) is the brainchild of a
former U.N. employee named Hans Hoegh. The IDF is raising money
throughout the world (including the United States) in the name of
people with disabilities as a group. Arne Husveg, president of
the European Blind Union and a fellow countryman of Mr. Hoegh,
proposed that the WBU accept financial help from the
International Disability Foundation and free office space in the
center it plans to establish at The Hague in the Netherlands. I
contended that if the WBU accepts such help from the
International Disability Foundation, it will be violating its
announced policy of supporting specialized services and
organizations of and for the blind. Mr. Husveg, with his usual
penchant for avoiding personal attacks and dealing with issues,
said that my logic was shallow and my outlook one of calamity and
pessimism. He went on to say that it would be all right to accept
money and office space from the IDF if the WBU were assured that
it would have a substantial voice in IDF's policies and decision
making.
     I argued that it didn't matter how much voice the WBU had if
it accepted IDF office space and money. Hoegh's International
Disability Foundation could and would correctly say that it was
raising money for the World Blind Union, and the World Blind
Union would find it increasingly difficult to raise money on its
own and separately. Mr. Husveg argued that the United Nations
wants all disability groups to work together and that, therefore,
the WBU must either engage in such joint action or not have U.N.
recognition. I told him that legislative and executive bodies
consistently pressure all disability groups to merge and speak
with a common voice. This means spending less money for the needs
of the blind and other groups, and it makes it easier for the
disabled to be lumped into an amorphous, colorless mass and
ignored. These pressures to merge are not a new problem, but we
gain nothing by meekly submitting to them. The United Nations and
the rest of the world will recognize and deal with organizations
and specialized programs for the blind if we reasonably and
vigorously insist on it, but they certainly will not if we
quietly lie down and die.
     Ultimately the lure of the money carried the day. I asked
for a roll call vote, and when the tally was taken, the North
America/Caribbean votes were unanimously against the proposal. We
were the only ones who voted against it, however. A few other
delegates abstained, but nobody else stood to be counted. The
decision was that Mr. Husveg (representing the WBU) will
negotiate with Mr. Hoegh and that if he is satisfied that the WBU
will have sufficient voice in IDF decisions, the WBU will locate
its principal office in the disability center at The Hague with
the other disability groups and that the WBU will accept IDF
financial support. In my opinion this was the most critical vote
taken at the meeting, and also in my opinion it has within it the
seeds of the possible destruction of the World Blind Union.
     There are many more things that I could say about the
meetings, but I will leave them for another time. For now let it
suffice that the organization seems to have stabilized its
finances and got itself on an even keel. Its budget is skimpy
when compared with the urgent needs that exist throughout the
world but impressive when compared with the problems that have
been faced and solved. There can be no question that Dr. Euclid
Herie has done a competent job of fiscal management and
stewardship. An effort is being made to establish a separate
foundation to fund the WBU, but the project is still in the
formative stages.
     In view of commitments I made concerning money, I should
mention at least one other matter. It involves the Louis Braille
birthplace and museum at Coupvray, France. Every blind person in
the world owes a debt to Louis Braille. He gave us the means of
literacy, and ultimately of freedom and equal participation in
society. The home where he was born has been operated for many
years as a museum. It is now in such bad repair that it is in
danger of total destruction. It has been closed to the public for
safety reasons, and its future is in doubt.
     When the World Blind Union was established in 1984, it
assumed responsibility for the upkeep and operation of the Louis
Braille Museum, but there has never been enough money. We of the
National Federation of the Blind have made contributions from
time to time, and so have a few others from here and there
throughout the world. Mostly, however, people have simply debated
and tried to assess blame.
     At the Melbourne meeting we were told that the Louis Braille
Committee of the World Blind Union and the French organizations
of the blind had recently held discussions with the mayor of
Coupvray and that an architect had been employed to make plans
and get cost estimates. We were further told that approximately
$110,000 is needed to make permanent repairs to the Louis Braille
home. This would not be simply a patch job but a thorough
renovation. We were told that the mayor of Coupvray has said that
he will find $55,000 if somebody else will provide the other
$55,000.
     At the conclusion of the report, the usual debating and
finger-pointing began. It seemed clear that no conclusive action
would be taken and that the Louis Braille home would likely be
allowed to continue to deteriorate. Feeling that we not only had
an obligation to the memory of Louis Braille but also to the
blind of future generations, I could not remain silent. Trusting
that the blind of the United States would back me, I said that if
the facts were as reported, I would go home and try to raise the
$55,000 to match the pledge of the mayor of Coupvray. In fact, I
said I would try to find somewhat more than $55,000 if the
estimates proved low. Although there was general approval, even
this proposal brought a certain amount of wrangling.
Nevertheless, it was agreed (with one negative vote being cast)
that I should make the effort.
     I am now in the process of finalizing the matter, and I hope
that the blind and our friends throughout the United States will
rise to the challenge. I invite local and state affiliates of the
Federation, individual blind persons, and friends of blind
persons to make contributions to this cause if they wish.
Donations should be sent to the National Federation of the Blind,
1800 Johnson Street, Baltimore, Maryland 21230. Checks should be
made payable to the National Federation of the Blind, and an
accompanying letter should indicate the purpose of the
contribution. Donations may also be made by credit card by
calling (410) 659-9314. Obviously such contributions should be in
addition to what individuals and affiliates already intend to
give.
     Before talking about the agencies doing work with the blind
in Australia, I should probably give a few background facts to
put matters in perspective. Australia has about 17,000,000
people. Most of them live in cities along the southern and
eastern coasts. Some live in cities along the northern coast, and
a few live along the western coast. Only a scattering live
inland. The country is divided into six states, the most populous
being New South Wales, with Sydney as its capital. Victoria (with
Melbourne as its capital) is the second most populous state,
having something over 4,000,000.
     Australia's monetary unit is the dollar. One American dollar
is worth about a dollar and thirty-two cents in Australian money.
They have less paper and more coins than we do. There are both
one-dollar and two-dollar coins, and no paper until you get to a
five-dollar bill.
     Two major agencies for the blind headquarter in Melbourne.
They are the Association for the Blind and the Royal Victorian
Institute for the Blind (RVIB).
     Mrs. Jernigan and I met with John Cook, the executive
director of the Association for the Blind, and we visited the
Association's library. A number of blind people told us that the
Association regards itself as somewhat of a rival of RVIB and
that it tends to cater to blind persons who are perhaps a little
less in the mainstream than those who deal with RVIB. Be this as
it may, Mr. Cook told us that his budget is about 15,000,000 U.S.
dollars per year. The Association has a Braille library and a
library of two-track regular speed cassette recordings. It does
not provide tape players to the borrowers.
     The Association has one service both worthwhile and unique
which I had occasion to use. It operates a radio station (call
letters 3RPH) on the regular AM band. This station operates
twenty-four hours a day seven days a week and has good
programming: newspapers, books, special features, and some of the
broadcasts from the BBC. The reading is done by volunteers, and
they are well-trained and do a good job.
     Mr. Cook said that there was originally an FM station
devoted to programming for the blind and that a number of AM
broadcasters thought it would have more commercial value than the
stations they owned. Therefore, a deal was worked out. AM station
operators were permitted to bid for the FM channel used by the
blind, and the successful bidder was given the FM license. In
turn, the blind were given an AM frequency and certain operating
funds. Yes, I know it sounds strange, but that's what Mr. Cook
told me--and I am certainly glad the station was there.
     Mr. Cook told me that the Association also operates a dial-
up newspaper for the blind. He said that it started in September
of 1993, that annual subscriptions cost about $100, and that
there are about 100 blind subscribers. I used a regular touch
tone phone and called the newsline. The volunteer readers seemed
to be doing a good job. By pressing different numbers I could
select what part of the newspaper I wanted to read and could scan
forward and backward. The volunteers put the newspaper on tape,
which is then handled by a computer to interact with the
telephone calls--much in the same way, I believe, that New Mexico
and the NFB of California are doing.
     Mr. Cook further told me that the association operates
nursing homes, day centers, low-vision centers, and telephone
peer-group conversations and counseling. I did not see any of
these programs in action, so I have only a general notion of
their functioning and effectiveness.
     Since the WBU officers and executive committee meetings were
held at the RVIB facilities, I met quite a number of the staff,
including Peter Evans, the executive director. Mr. Evans was
cordial and responsive. RVIB also has a library, but unlike the
one operated by the Association for the Blind, it distributes
four-track slow-speed cassettes and provides cassette players.
RVIB has a Braille library, but it is quite limited. New South
Wales and RVIB plan to join together to create a national library
for Australia, which would apparently distribute both Braille and
recorded material throughout the continent. RVIB has a newspaper
service for the blind, too. It is distributed on cassette and
consists of regional or suburban newspapers. I gather that for
the most part these are weeklies, thus making time not such a
critical factor.
     As head of employment services for RVIB, David Blyth holds
the highest position of any blind person employed by the agency.
He is in charge of two workshops, one for persons whose primary
problem is blindness, and one for persons with additional
problems. He told me that some eighty people work in the shops. I
was told that wages for the shop workers range from $160 per week
for the slowest to $250 per week for the best.
     These wages should be viewed in the context of the pay
received by other Australian workers. There is a governmentally
created industrial commission, which establishes minimum wages
for all Australian workers who are paid wages or salaries. The
minimum (called an "award wage") varies with the classification
of the employee. The lowest award wage is $280 per week. Thus, as
in the United States, shop workers do not get the minimum wage.
     However, Australia does have a universal "pension" for the
blind, which is not subject to a means test. The pension has been
in existence since early in the century but was only freed from
the means test in 1975. No other disability group has this
benefit. I was told that the pension for the blind is $160 per
week for a single person and $120 per week for a married person.
If two blind people marry, each receives $120 per week.
Presumably if they live together unmarried, each will continue to
receive $160 per week, which leads to the conclusion that living
in sin is rewarded and marriage discouraged. This is no
different, however, from some of the Social Security programs in
the U.S.
     Let me be sure I am making my meaning clear about the nature
of the pension. Whether rich or poor, young or old, employed or
unemployed, retired or otherwise, each and every blind person in
Australia is entitled to a pension regardless of any other income
or circumstance. If shop workers complain (as many doubtless do)
that they are not being paid the minimum wage, the government can
(and doubtless does) reply that when the wages of a shop worker
are added to his or her pension, more than the minimum award wage
is being received.
     As part of RVIB's employment services, David Blyth does more
than supervise the workshops. He has programs for both industrial
and professional training and placement. The training programs
are coordinated with the activities of the workshops.
Incidentally, a brochure published by RVIB says that the shops do
packaging, mop manufacturing, and production of wood products.
     RVIB runs a school for the blind. Formerly it was for
residential students, whose primary problem was blindness. Now,
students are mainly housed in foster homes and mostly have
multiple handicaps.
     The RVIB gets its money from the sale of workshop products,
from private fund-raising, and from the government--with the
largest part coming from the government. Apparently these
government funds are not direct appropriations but grants and
contracts. The total budget is about 13,000,000 Australian
dollars per year. As I review my summary of the activities of the
RVIB, I see that I have failed to mention that the organization
sells and distributes aids and appliances for the blind.
     As to contacts with individual blind persons, I should begin
by saying that the National Federation of Blind Citizens of
Australia is the largest and most active consumer group in the
country. When I worked in California in the 1950's, Hugh Jeffreys
visited Dr. tenBroek in Berkeley to talk about establishing an
organization of the blind. I worked with Hugh on organizational
details such as what kind of constitution and by-laws should be
written and the qualifications of members. I was pleased to see
Hugh again when I was in Melbourne. I met him and a number of
other Federation members and leaders one night at a barbecue held
at RVIB for the WBU visitors.
     Mrs. Jernigan and I had dinner one evening at the home of
Martin and Helen Stewart. Martin works in the shop and is head of
the union. The shop workers' union is part of the trade union
system in the country. I urged Martin to become more active in
the National Federation of Blind Citizens of Australia, pointing
out to him that the shop workers union can never be as strong as
the total body of the Federation and that the trade union
movement will never make the problems of the blind a prime focus.
The exchange was spirited and friendly, but I am not sure how far
I got. Incidentally, Helen (who is sighted) drives a street car,
which is called a tram. The Stewarts have an adorable, active
baby and seem to be a happy, productive working couple. They were
excellent hosts, and we became friends.
     Also under the heading of contacts with blind persons, I
should mention that Mrs. Jernigan and I had dinner and spent an
evening at the home of David Blyth, where we not only enjoyed the
company of David but also that of his wife Jessie and their son,
David, Jr. The Blyths went out of their way to make our stay in
Australia comfortable and pleasant. We had become acquainted with
David, Jr., earlier when he came to the United States to attend a
Federation convention with his father. At the Blyths' home we sat
in the back yard in summer weather, admired the lemon tree, and
picked plums.
     Let me move now to miscellaneous activities, which might be
called extracurricular. As I have already said, it was summer, a
sharp contrast with the sub-zero temperatures we had left in
Baltimore. One afternoon it got to 105 degrees.
     We took a day before the formal meetings began and drove out
into the country, with Jessie Blyth and David, Jr., serving as
our guides and companions. First we went to a wildlife preserve,
and I was able to touch the animals. As we went in, we were given
bread to feed the kangaroos, and they were eager to have it. The
kangaroo with whom I became most intimately acquainted was a
little more than waist high. It was a very courteous kangaroo.
While it was eating bread from my hand, one of its teeth touched
me. But the kangaroo didn't bite. It simply shifted a little and
kept coming after the bread. When it thought the pieces of bread
were too large, it took them in its front feet (which look like
little hands), broke them into smaller bits, and then ate them.
     Just before we met the kangaroo, we saw a man hauling a
wombat in a wheelbarrow. Mrs. Jernigan asked if the animal was
sick, but the man said that he was simply transporting it to a
new location, which led me to observe that the wombat has it
made. Humans work to feed it, and they haul it around when it
needs to go somewhere. All it has to do is relax and take it
easy. I petted the wombat, and it felt somewhat like the pigs we
used to have on the farm. I didn't think the wombat would bite
me, but I kept my hand just at the back of its head so that I
could turn with it when it moved. Now and again it raised up,
looked around, stretched luxuriously, and settled down again. It
seemed to have a pretty good life.
     I was also able to examine and pet a koala bear. It was
being held by one of the game preserve employees, and it seemed
to enjoy being petted. Just as a precaution, I kept my hand at
the back of its head, too.
     We were told some interesting things about the animals. The
koala is very picky about its eating. The game preserve employees
go out and cut the tenderest branches from the eucalyptus trees
and bring them to the koala. They say that it rejects about
ninety-five percent of what they bring and eats only part of the
rest. It sleeps nine or ten hours a day, eats for about four
hours, and rests most of the remainder of the time. It, too, has
a pretty good life. As one of the employees said, "I have to work
hard to feed that bear."
     We learned that the koala and the wombat originally came
from the same stock. The koala took to the trees, and the wombat
moved into burroughs under ground. There were also ostriches and
emus. I certainly didn't pet (or try to pet) either of them. The
emu has a long sharp beak and kept sneaking up behind me and
trying to get the kangaroo's bread. I also had the chance to hear
magpies, and I now know what it means when somebody is accused of
chattering like a magpie.
     When we left the game preserve, we went to the Seppelt
Winery at Great Western, almost a hundred miles northwest of
Melbourne. They took us twenty-five feet underground to a network
of tunnels cut into granite. These tunnels, which are said to be
the most extensive network of underground wine cellars in the
southern hemisphere, were dug (probably with convict labor)
during the middle of the last century. They contain millions of
bottles of wine. It was quite an experience. The main tunnels are
fairly wide, with branching corridors of ten or twelve feet in
width running for miles in all directions. We walked down the
center, and on both sides were endless stacks of bottles in
layers on top of each other four to six feet high. The guide said
we should not touch anything, but I interpreted his injunction
liberally. Mrs. Jernigan and I drifted toward the back of the
group and let everybody get around a corner. Then I made an
examination, which I felt sure the management would have wanted
me to do if the question had arisen.
     The temperature in the tunnels is constant year-round, about
fifty-five degrees. At the end of one of the side tunnels there
is a good sized room, which would hold thirty people or so. It is
the place where the winery formerly stored its most valuable
brandy, but it has now been converted into an ultra swank private
restaurant, where occasional VIP dinners are served. It is called
the Brandy-Nook. Mrs. Jernigan, who thinks about such things,
wondered whether the women in their fancy dresses would get cold.
     When we came upstairs to the winery showroom, we were
offered tastings and examined various sale items. Among other
things, we found some exquisite hand-blown wine glasses. I had
never seen anything like them. They were called port pipes
because of the little stem on the side through which the wine is
to be sipped. Needless to say, we bought some of them and now
proudly display them.
     While we were in Melbourne, we found time to visit grocery
and department stores to compare prices and merchandise. On one
such occasion in a large department store, the salesperson was
especially polite and helpful. She walked all the way across the
store with us to more than one location to try to help us find a
given item. Mrs. Jernigan said that we would not find a
salesperson in the U.S. who would be so accommodating, but I
suggested to her that human nature being what it is, you probably
would. The salesperson would not likely help a native but might
very well bend over backward to accommodate a foreigner. Our
Australian hosts confirmed this by saying that they rarely get
such service.
     We went to a music store and found what we were told were
typical Australian songs. Many of you doubtless heard one of them
on a recent presidential release, "Fry Me Kangaroo Brown." There
may be other selections that are more typical (and we bought some
of them), but I doubt that any of them are more fun than "Fry Me
Kangaroo Brown."
     Apropos of nothing I learned a new expression while I was in
Australia. I have often heard people advised to put their "best
foot forward," but I have never heard the expression, "He has
been on his back foot lately."
     Prince Charles was visiting Melbourne while we were there,
and he was taking quite a beating from some of the newspapers.
One of them said, "He's been on his back foot lately." It wasn't
meant to be complimentary.
     Australia was an unforgettable experience. We left on
February 2 and came back through Hawaii, where we attended the
state convention. Enroute from Melbourne to Hawaii we crossed the
international date line, which meant that we arrived in Hawaii
before we left Melbourne. So with jet lag and scrambled days, we
flew home and stepped back into the snow and cold.


[PHOTO--Arne Husveg seated at table wearing earphone for
interpreting device.
CAPTION--Arne Husveg, President of the European Region of the
World Blind
Union.]

              TALK POOR BY DAY; LIVE RICH BY NIGHT
                       by Kenneth Jernigan

     One of the headlines of the London Times for Sunday, August
15, 1993, reads as follows: "Talk Poor by Day; Live Rich by
Night: The Corrupt Heart of the UN Bureaucracy." Developments at
the meeting of the World Blind Union Executive Committee in
Melbourne in late January of this year make the London Times
headline and accompanying article of interest to Monitor readers.
The web of events is complicated and thought-provoking.
     A number of years ago (I think it may have been in London in
1989) Arne Husveg, president of the European region of the World
Blind Union, talked to the WBU officers about a new way to raise
money for the organization. He brought with him to the meeting
one Hans Hoegh, his fellow countryman from Norway. Mr. Hoegh was
billed as a UN functionary of some importance. He was to be
instrumental in establishing an organization called the
International Disability Foundation (IDF), which would raise
money and do other good things for people with disabilities,
including the blind. Mr. Hoegh assured us that his IDF would have
strong support from the UN and would be backed by UN Secretary
General Javier Prez de Cullar. He also implied that the World
Blind Union had better get with it and get on board. Otherwise,
it would have a hard time raising money and would get short
shrift from the UN.
     Some of us said that we were concerned about having the WBU
submerge itself in the general melting pot of the generic
disability movement, but we were silenced by promises of money
and threats of not being recognized by the UN. We left that
London meeting with visions of sugarplums dancing in our heads
and with glowing assurances that the ties between the World Blind
Union and the proposed IDF would constantly strengthen and result
in fame and fortune.
     In Melbourne this January the drumfire continued. With the
North America/Caribbean delegates standing alone and voting no,
Mr. Husveg carried the day and held high the banner of Hans Hoegh
and his International Disability Foundation. As reported in the
previous article, the WBU Executive Committee decided (with
certain reservations) to move its headquarters into Mr. Hoegh's
International Disability Center in The Hague and to accept money
from the International Disability Foundation. Apparently Mr.
Hoegh, who is now secretary general of the IDF, is still
headquartering in Geneva, Switzerland, until a place is prepared
for him at The Hague in the Netherlands.
     So why do I bring all of this up since much of it was
mentioned in the preceding article? Well, there have been
subsequent developments. To begin with, I have now read the
article which appeared in the London Times for August 15 of last
year, the headline of which I quoted earlier. Here is part of
that article:

          Neelam Merani is living high off the hog. The 52-
     year-old United Nations official spends his days
     relaxing on the sun-drenched terrace of his luxury
     apartment in Geneva, overlooking the city's lake. At
     night he and his Swiss wife, Esther, do the round of
     elegant parties on the UN's international cocktail
     circuit.
          The hundred thousand pound (at least 150,000 U.S.
     dollar) salary that supports the Meranis' comfortable
     lifestyle includes a special allowance to cover the
     high cost of living in the Swiss city. Merani no longer
     works, but his salary continues to be paid out of UN
     funds.
          Two years ago Merani (an Indian-born UN career
     official, who joined the organization in London in
     1964) was moved from his position as head of a UN
     campaign to raise global awareness of natural
     disasters. Grandly titled the International Decade for
     Natural Disaster Reduction (IDNDR), the project was
     part of the UN's refugee programme.
          But a year after its launch in 1990, the IDNDR was
     dubbed the "disaster decade" by critics, who accused
     its secretariat of waste, mismanagement, and
     inefficiency. In one year alone the campaign spent half
     its 1 million pound income on salaries and staff
     travel.
          Merani was blamed, he says unfairly, for the
     failure. Some in the UN unkindly nicknamed him the
     "master of disaster." He was moved sideways to the
     World Meteorological Organization (WMO), which studies
     weather patterns. Later he was told to go home on
     "special leave" and wait further orders. Although he
     still lists his occupation in the Geneva directory as
     "UN functionnaire," he has not been asked to lift a
     finger for the UN since.
          Merani's bosses at UN headquarters in Geneva
     decline to discuss his case. They have drawn a veil
     over his existence. They say he has "left" the UN and
     is no longer on its payroll. But Merani insists he is
     still being paid.
          Merani is one of at least 39 UN staff--15
     professionals and 24 general service employees--who are
     retained on full salary without having a real job.
     Officially known as supernumeraries, they cost the
     taxpayers and donors who fund the UN an estimated 2
     million pounds a year.
          Critics say Merani's position and that of other
     supernumeraries, nicknamed "desk warmers," demonstrate
     how millions of pounds that should be earmarked for
     relief supplies and peacekeeping efforts are spent
     instead supporting a vast and uncontrolled bureaucracy.
          Dick Thornburgh, a former American attorney-
     general, appointed last year to root out waste in the
     UN, said: "There are a number of senior people who have
     high positions and no assignment and yet there is no
     capability to terminate these people's jobs."
          Internal audit reports reveal an alarming pattern
     of abuse, mismanagement, and greed, which has become
     endemic in the organization. In the last two-year
     period alone, 540 million pounds have been squandered,
     one former senior UN official said.
          Money which the public might assume was destined
     for the needy in drought-stricken or war-torn areas has
     instead been spent on projects that have nothing to do
     with aid or peacekeeping.
          At a time when the organization is appealing to
     member countries and the public for tens of millions of
     pounds in voluntary donations, senior UN officials
     continue to enjoy generous benefits, perks, and job-
     for-life expectations that would never be tolerated
     outside.
          The hub of the UN's international operations, and
     the root of most of its problems, is a monolithic 38-
     story office complex overlooking the East River in
     Manhattan, New York.
          Here, 14,000 permanent staff are attached to the
     UN Secretariat and its dependencies. Their job is to
     service the principal UN organs--the general assembly,
     the security council secretariat, and the economic and
     social council--which shape UN policies and administer
     its programmes.
          When it was founded in 1945 to promote a new world
     order after the second world war, the UN employed just
     1,500 people.
          Yet, 48 years later it has become a bureaucracy
     run wild, employing more than 51,600 people
     internationally with a further 9,600 consultants
     employed by its agencies. Total spending by the UN for
     the two years ending in 1991 has mushroomed to nearly
     10 billion pounds. 
          Facilities at the UN's headquarters reflect the
     lavish lifestyles of many of its senior officials. They
     include a gourmet restaurant, an expensively furnished
     bar, and a lounge exclusively reserved for UN
     delegates. There is even a meditation room.
          Alan Keyes, a UN assistant secretary until 1987,
     was overruled in his objections to the installation of
     expensive heating equipment in the underground garage.
     "I thought it was a waste of money to worry about
     keeping cars warm when the people we are meant to be
     looking after could not even afford cars."
          Some of the worst losses, according to the UN's
     own audit reports, are in programmes designed to help
     the most disadvantaged people....
          One of the worst examples of abuse followed the
     decision by Prez de Cullar in April 1988 to appoint
     Hans Hoegh, a one-time Norwegian florist, as his
     special representative to raise funds for the promotion
     of the UN Decade of Disabled Persons. Hoegh's office
     spent 1 million pounds in two and a half years on
     "running expenses." The UN's own board of auditors
     stated: "No substantial funds have been raised for
     projects under the auspices of the United Nations. The
     objective ... was not met."...

     This is what the London Times reported last August, and I
want to make perfectly clear what I am saying and what I am not
saying. Although I have felt uneasy about Hans Hoegh and his
operation from the beginning, I cannot prove that there is
anything wrong with what he is doing or the way he is conducting
himself. During the Melbourne discussions I asked Mr. Husveg
whether Mr. Hoegh was being paid (or would be paid) for his work
as secretary general of the International Disability Foundation--
and Mr. Husveg said no. The reason I asked the question was
because I had been informed that Mr. Hoegh was trying to get a
high salary (probably $100,000 a year) to do similar work for
another disability organization and that he had been rebuffed by
that organization. I do not know whether this is true, but I was
given the information by a person whose integrity and
truthfulness I respect. 
     I have no evidence that would contradict Mr. Husveg's
statement that Mr. Hoegh is receiving no salary. I am simply
uneasy about the entire relationship between the World Blind
Union and the IDF, especially the danger that the interests of
the blind will be lost in the giant melting pot of the overall
disability stew. Moreover, I am skeptical about Mr. Hoegh's
ability to raise funds and about his standing in the
international community.  I am also troubled by the fact that Mr.
Prez de Cullar as Secretary General of the United Nations
appointed Mr. Hoegh to a UN PR and fundraising position that was
not successful--and then, after leaving his UN post as Secretary
General, accepted the presidency of Mr. Hoegh's International
Disability Foundation, Mr. Hoegh having also by that time been
separated from UN service.  Both Mr. Prez de Cullar and Mr.
Hoegh were high-paid officials of the UN. Both are now out. Who
in reality set up the IDF deal, and for what purpose? Who brought
the other on board--and why?  For that matter, how many other
former UN employees are looking for refuge in the International
Disability Foundation? You will meet one of them (Mr. John
Strome) later in this article. Is either Mr. Prez de Cullar or
Mr. Hoegh, or both of them, being paid?  Probably not.  Mr.
Husveg says Mr. Hoegh is not.  Nevertheless, I am still troubled.
     Apparently there are others who are also troubled. Early in
January of this year Mr. Hoegh sent what seems to be a form
letter, with appropriate variations, to a number of governments.
The one which was sent to Canada reads as follows:
     
     Geneva, Switzerland

     Dear Minister:
          On behalf of our President, Mr. Javier Prez de
     Cullar, we ask your consideration of the Government of
     Canada's assistance in a most important and
     constructive international initiative.
          Having reached a vital stage in our development
     progress, we request a Grant from the Government of
     Canada in the amount of

           90,000 Dutch Guilders ($60,700 Cdn Approx)

     to be applied toward the salary and relocation costs of
     a Canadian citizen, Mr. J. A. John Strome. As you may
     know, Mr. Strome, after finishing his appointment with
     the United Nations Office in Vienna, has worked with us
     as a Consultant and has extensive knowledge of this
     initiative from its earliest conception. Mr. Strome
     would be available to take up this very important
     position of Centre Coordinator as of 1 February 1994.
          Enclosed is a letter of support from the City of
     The Hague regarding the nomination of Mr. Strome for
     the position of Centre Coordinator.
          Also enclosed, as background information, are
     materials pertinent to the development, activities, and
     progress of the International Disability Foundation.
          Your very earliest response indication would be
     greatly appreciated.

     Yours sincerely,
     Hans Hoegh
     Secretary General
     The International Disability Foundation

     The response of the Canadian government (sent by fax) is
instructive. Here it is:

     Ontario, Canada
     January 28, 1994

     Dear Hans:

          Thank you for your letter of January 7, 1994,
     regarding the establishment of an International
     Disability Centre in the City of The Hague.
          As you know, Canada has a long history of support
     and involvement in issues of concern to people with
     disabilities. We have participated in a number of
     international initiatives and continue to encourage
     attention to disability questions through many
     international forums.
          Canada wants to meet contemporary economic and
     social challenges in a responsive yet proactive manner.
     One exemplary initiative is our national comprehensive
     review of social policies and programs. This is a major
     undertaking which includes income support systems,
     training, and employment programs. Services which
     impact people with disabilities are an important part
     of this review, and they are a special consideration
     for our attention.
          With this in mind, I must advise that it is
     premature and probably pre-emptive to identify the
     International Disability Centre as a priority project
     for us. Of course, we are concerned about partnerships
     and international cooperation on disability questions,
     but we are in no position to make any commitments
     beyond initiatives already underway.
          Now more than ever, our government must identify
     cost-effective ways and means of developing its
     international disability agenda. We realize the
     importance of sharing experience and expertise over the
     coming year, and wish you well in the work of the
     International Disability Centre, as well as the
     International Disability Foundation.
          The employment status of John Strome, as raised in
     your note, is of concern to us. Certainly, John's
     contribution and dedication to persons with
     disabilities, in Canada and abroad, is well recognized
     and we do appreciate your collaboration in this regard.
     Your consideration in ensuring John's continued
     contribution to the work of the IDF will be
     appreciated.

     Yours sincerely,
     Nancy Lawand
     Executive Director
     Status of Disabled Persons Section
     Government of Canada

     This is what the Canadian government said, and apparently
John Strome immediately felt the bite. He complained that his
repatriation expenses (presumably the UN money earmarked to bring
him home after his tour of UN duty) was no longer available since
it had been used by Hoegh's IDF to bring him to Switzerland for
IDF employment, for which Canada was expected to foot the bill.
He spoke of what he called "late-arising internal circumstances,"
which probably meant Canada's unwillingness to pay the tab and
Hoegh's resulting embarassment and pique. Under date of January
28, 1994, (the very date of Ms. Lawand's faxed letter to Hans
Hoegh) Mr. Strome sent the following telefax:

                             URGENT

     TO:  Skip Brooks
          Status of Disabled Persons Secretariat
          Hull Quebec, Canada

          Urgent I speak with you later today (after 13:30
     hours your time). I can be reached at home (+41 22 788-
     6600). Due to late-arising internal circumstances,
     employer not reimbursing my monies for January nor
     considering my repatriation expenses which they used
     from UN to bring me here. Now stuck in Geneva--broke,
     hungry, and needing advice.

     Kindest regards,
     John Strome
     
     Hot on the heels of the Strome communication came a fax
(curt and brief) from Hans Hoegh. Here it is:

     Geneva, Switzerland
     February 1, 1994

     To: Mrs. Nancy Lawand
     From: Hans Hoegh (International Disability Centre, The
          Hague)

     Dear Nancy:
          Many thanks for your fax of 28 January 1994.
          As you know, John Strome's contract with the
     International Disability Foundation expired 31 December
     1993. We prolonged it for one month waiting for your
     answer.
          As it was made clear right from the beginning, the
     International Disability Foundation has no financial
     resources to ensure John's employment in The Hague.

     Yours sincerely,
     Hans Hoegh
     Secretary General

     What is one to make of all these charges, communications,
maneuverings, and pleadings? I don't know--but I do know this: I
for one hope that the World Blind Union will rethink its
contemplated involvement with Hans Hoegh and his International
Disability Foundation. His behavior and record speak for
themselves. There are troubles enough in the world without going
out and trying to find more.
