Please see the following links for videos that have been produced in response to the Brennpunkt documentary “Caught in Micro Debt.” originally shown by Norwegian TV on November 30th 2010
1. Response to false allegations in "Caught in Micro Debt" – Jobra: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1JGBQnrC-cw
Filmmaker Gayle Ferraro takes a trip to Jobra, Bangladesh, to seek what really happened to Sophia Begum, the famous bamboo stool maker whom Muhammad Yunus writes about in his books. Tom Heinemann's documentary "Caught in Micro Debt" falsely alleges that he talked to her daughter, and that she died in poverty, but Gayle reveals that the woman he interviewed was not her daughter and that Sophia Begum is alive and prospering.
2. Hilary Village – Kartik Interview: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bsWwj8eqihY
Kartik - A villager in the documentary "Caught in Micro Credit" recounts his earlier negative story of Grameen Bank in his village to the journalists and tells of it's success. He was denied a loan at the time because of an injury and was angry.
3. Hilary Village – Jude Fernando Interview: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VI544LiUgTg
Jude Fernando - The questions regarding the visit by Hillary Clinton to Bangladesh and a particular village are explored to reveal that village was both in proximity to another location she needed to visit and it was an untouchable caste. Grameen Bank thought she would be interested to see how they they are doing.
4. Response to “Caught in Micro Debt” – Nerunnahar Begum: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcdRi2S2bxM
This video is a response to the dangerously inaccurate Norwegian public television documentary "Caught in Micro-debt". Nerunnahar Begum, one of the subjects of that film, is interviewed here and it is shown that she is not, in fact, the daughter of the first Grameen Bank borrower Sufiya Begum, as had been claimed. In addition, there is an interview with a woman who turns out to be Sufiya herself, alive and well, thereby disproving the claim made in "Caught in Micro-debt" that Sufiya died years ago in extreme poverty.
5. Response to false interest rate allegations in "Caught in Micro Debt" -- Alex Counts: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w2ndLC4EDQ4.
Alex Counts, President and CEO of Grameen Foundation, talks about his experience working with filmmaker Tom Heinemann, whose documentary, "Caught in Micro Debt," misrepresented Grameen Bank's interest rates.
6. Response to false interest rate allegations in “Caught in Micro Debt” – David Roodman: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2mdPS4rLb4M.
David Roodman, Senior Fellow at the Center for Global Development, talks about his experience working with filmmaker Tom Heinemann, whose documentary, "Caught in Micro Debt," misrepresented Grameen Bank's interest rates.
7. Interview with Erik Solheim: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IR05d9j5W6U
Response in relation to Norad's report on Grameen after the documentary "caught in micro debt" by Erik Solheim, Minister of the Environment and International Development in Norway. The full NORAD report may be found here: http://www.regjeringen.no/en/dep/ud/press/news/2010/report_grameen.html?id=62...
Here is a list of sites that are following the situation in Bangladesh:
1. For the most up-to-date information, please check the Grameen Bank (http://www.grameen.com/) website.
2. If you’re interested you can support Professor Yunus and the independence of Grameen Bank by joining online campaigns such as the Support Yunus (http://www.facebook.com/SupportYunus ) Facebook page
3. You can follow Grameen America (www.grameenamerica.org) on Facebook (www.facebook.com/pages/Grameen-America/108588249174634 ) and Twitter (http://www.Twitter.com/GrameenAmerica ) and continuing your support of Grameen and asking your friends to do the same.
4. To Catch A Dollar (http://www.tocatchadollar.com/ ) is a documentary on Professor Yunus and Grameen America which will be in select theaters on March 31st. You can follow To Catch A Dollar on Facebook (www.facebook.com/tocatchadollar ) and on Twitter (www.twitter.com/tocatchadollar ).
Friday, 4 March 2011
Wednesday, 2 March 2011
Professor Yunus remains Managing Director of Grameen Bank
Friends of Grameen denounces the new attempt of destabilization against Professor Yunus.
The announcement by the new Chairman is without enforceability.
Paris, 2nd March 2011
Today, the new Chairman of Grameen Bank, recently appointed by the Government, announced that Professor Yunus stepped down from his position as Managing Director, as this position had been declared illegal. Referring to a letter from the Central Bank, this request by the Chairman is legally beyond his
authority. After the unauthorized statements by the Chairman, Grameen Bank has officially announced that Professor Muhammad Yunus validly remains its Managing Director.
This new development appears as a renewed and immediate threat for Grameen Bank as an independent institution and a new step in the destabilization campaign pursued by the Government. According to the Ordinance that created Grameen Bank in 1983, the Government is appointing 3 members of the board, out of a total of 12. Today, the Bank is essentially owned by more than 8 million borrowers, who elect the other 9 board members among themselves. The Government owns the remaining fraction of the Bank's equity.
The Government-led actions have been increasingly legally groundless over the last few days, and Friends of Grameen will keep monitoring the situation closely and continue to advocate for a lawful and fair treatment of Grameen Bank and Professor Yunus, as their contribution to the world is unique and ultimately belongs to the poor of Bangladesh and beyond.
About Friends of Grameen
“Friends of Grameen” is a voluntary association established under the French law of 1901. The purpose of the association is the promotion and development of microcredit and social business, in particular the microcredit activities of Grameen Bank and its affiliates. The Honorary Committee is chaired by Mary Robinson, former President of Ireland and former United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. The Executive Committee is chaired by Maria Nowak, President of ADIE, a pioneering French microfinance institution created in 1989.
Press contacts:
Vincent Dujardin : 00 33 1 41 86 76 48 / 00 33 6 14 11 38 67
Xavier Bossaert: 00 33 1 41 86 76 97 / 00 33 6 19 41 50 18
Emilie Rapley: 00 33 1 41 86 76 14 / 00 33 6 29 22 82 01
The announcement by the new Chairman is without enforceability.
Paris, 2nd March 2011
Today, the new Chairman of Grameen Bank, recently appointed by the Government, announced that Professor Yunus stepped down from his position as Managing Director, as this position had been declared illegal. Referring to a letter from the Central Bank, this request by the Chairman is legally beyond his
authority. After the unauthorized statements by the Chairman, Grameen Bank has officially announced that Professor Muhammad Yunus validly remains its Managing Director.
This new development appears as a renewed and immediate threat for Grameen Bank as an independent institution and a new step in the destabilization campaign pursued by the Government. According to the Ordinance that created Grameen Bank in 1983, the Government is appointing 3 members of the board, out of a total of 12. Today, the Bank is essentially owned by more than 8 million borrowers, who elect the other 9 board members among themselves. The Government owns the remaining fraction of the Bank's equity.
The Government-led actions have been increasingly legally groundless over the last few days, and Friends of Grameen will keep monitoring the situation closely and continue to advocate for a lawful and fair treatment of Grameen Bank and Professor Yunus, as their contribution to the world is unique and ultimately belongs to the poor of Bangladesh and beyond.
About Friends of Grameen
“Friends of Grameen” is a voluntary association established under the French law of 1901. The purpose of the association is the promotion and development of microcredit and social business, in particular the microcredit activities of Grameen Bank and its affiliates. The Honorary Committee is chaired by Mary Robinson, former President of Ireland and former United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. The Executive Committee is chaired by Maria Nowak, President of ADIE, a pioneering French microfinance institution created in 1989.
Press contacts:
Vincent Dujardin : 00 33 1 41 86 76 48 / 00 33 6 14 11 38 67
Xavier Bossaert: 00 33 1 41 86 76 97 / 00 33 6 19 41 50 18
Emilie Rapley: 00 33 1 41 86 76 14 / 00 33 6 29 22 82 01
Monday, 31 January 2011
Documentary on Microcredit being shown by Danmarks Radio 31. January at 22:00
In my opinion it is always good with open debate about microcredit as long as the correct information is presentet. The facts below are therefore presented in relation to a documentary that will be shown in DR1 tonight at 22:00. I assume that the film offered for broadcast in Denmark is an English-language version of a film originally shown on NRK Norway on November 30, 2010. The filmmaker, Tom Heinemann, has publicly written that he was making an English-language version that would be aired in Denmark and Sweden. I am here explaining three serious respects in which the film contains false and defamatory accusations against Grameen Bank and Professor Muhammad Yunus – accusations that need to be kept in mind in relation to this film unless these false accusations have been removed already:
NORAD Aid
One principal charge made in the film relates to financial dealings between Grameen Bank and the Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (NORAD), a directorate under the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The charge concerns matters that arose more than a decade ago, that were promptly addressed by Grameen Bank, the relevant Norwegian authorities and the government of Bangladesh, and that were fully and finally resolved at the time. By selective use of a few documents from that time, the film suggests that very significant sums of aid money were diverted by Grameen Bank, in violation of the conditions on which they were provided, and used for improper commercial enrichment.
I assume that you are aware that, as a consequence of the film’s airing on November 30, 2010, Norway’s Minister of International Development commissioned an urgent and comprehensive review of all NORAD’s support for Grameen Bank. This report, published on December 7, examined the relevant earlier exchanges, and concluded that the issues raised at the time by the Norwegian Embassy in Dhaka had been satisfactorily explained and resolved. See the full report here: http://www.regjeringen.no/en/dep/ud/press/news/2010/report_grameen.html?id=627366
Interest Rates
Another central charge made in the film is that Grameen Bank charges excessive interest rates. Specifically, the film in its Norwegian version accuses Grameen Bank of charging its borrowers annual interest rates of between 30% to 200%. This was and is factually incorrect. As an expert on microfinance, Alex Counts was interviewed by Mr. Heinemann on film about this issue, as was David Roodman, Senior Fellow of the Center for Global Development. Both specifically told Mr. Heinemann that his figures were wrong, but he ignored the corrections at that time. Hopefully this is corrected in this version of the film. Film interviews with Alex Counts and David Roodman show how their statements to Mr. Heinemann were willfully misrepresented in the film – for more information, see http://www.youtube.com/microfinanceresponse
In response to the unfounded assertions about interest rates in the film, Grameen Bank invited an independent expert, Chuck Waterfield of MicroFinance Transparency, to examine their rates, providing full access for that purpose. The MicroFinance Transparency report, dated January 4, 2011, is available at: http://www.mftransparency.org/pages/category/resources/pricing-certifications/. It shows, in particular, that the highest effective interest rate charged for Grameen Bank’s “basic loan” (the most expensive) is 22.84%. Other loans for higher education and housing attract substantially lower interest rates, and all loan products score an unprecedented 100% on the Transparency Index.
The Jobra Interview
The film seeks to portray Grameen Bank and Professor Yunus in a damaging light by way of interviews with individuals in Bangladesh, claiming that Professor Yunus made promises to them that were not kept, or that they have suffered in other ways at the hands of Grameen Bank due to high interest rates. The alleged suffering due to high interest rates is, as stated above, false. The film presents no real evidence to substantiate the other claims, and Professor Yunus refutes any claims made concerning him. Grameen Bank also denies such claims.
This element of the film is based on filmed interviews with individuals in Bangladesh, who are identified in the film and accompanied by commentary purporting to explain and clarify what it being said in Bangla by the interviewees. From our enquiries to date, it is evident that at least some of these interviews are not as represented in the film. For example, Mr. Heinemann claims to have interviewed the daughter of Professor Yunus’s original borrower, and, in the voiceover, claims that the original borrower died in deep poverty. After Mr. Heinemann’s film was aired on NRK Norway, an independent filmmaker, Ms. Gayle Ferraro, travelled to the place of the interview and found the person he interviewed. As can be seen from her film http://www.youtube.com/user/microfinanceresponse#p/a/u/0/1JGBQnrC-cw it turns out that the person Mr. Heinemann interviewed was not in fact who he claimed. In addition, Ms. Ferraro found that the woman who was the actual borrower described in Mr. Heinemann’s film was alive and well, and confirmed the true story of how she had been helped by Professor Yunus. Ms. Ferraro’s film shows that this part of Mr. Heinemann’s film is false.
It is surely not Grameen Bank’s or Professor Yunus’s intention to stifle debate on microfinance – indeed, the Bank, Prof. Yunus and Grameen Foundation all welcome healthy, balanced debate on the issues – but deliberate and repeated false and defamatory statements and unfounded attacks with intent to inflict harm and damage do not further that debate: they distort it. They feed sensationalism and confusion, and they damage the progress that they and all responsible microfinance institutions have made in helping millions of the world’s poorest citizens lift themselves from poverty. Some of the wider ramifications of this discussion are not for this letter, but are expressed in a recent article by Professor Yunus in the New York Times, which can be found at http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/15/opinion/15yunus.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=yunus&st=cse
You may not be aware that Grameen Bank is 95% owned by more than 8 million borrowers and members of the Grameen Bank in Bangladesh. About 4% is owned by the Government of Bangladesh. The borrowers and members of the Grameen bank are 97% women, who come from the poorest sectors of Bangladesh. To these people, Grameen Bank is a vital resource that enables them to improve the lives of themselves and their families. Attacks upon Grameen Bank directly harm the interests of these people.
NORAD Aid
One principal charge made in the film relates to financial dealings between Grameen Bank and the Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (NORAD), a directorate under the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The charge concerns matters that arose more than a decade ago, that were promptly addressed by Grameen Bank, the relevant Norwegian authorities and the government of Bangladesh, and that were fully and finally resolved at the time. By selective use of a few documents from that time, the film suggests that very significant sums of aid money were diverted by Grameen Bank, in violation of the conditions on which they were provided, and used for improper commercial enrichment.
I assume that you are aware that, as a consequence of the film’s airing on November 30, 2010, Norway’s Minister of International Development commissioned an urgent and comprehensive review of all NORAD’s support for Grameen Bank. This report, published on December 7, examined the relevant earlier exchanges, and concluded that the issues raised at the time by the Norwegian Embassy in Dhaka had been satisfactorily explained and resolved. See the full report here: http://www.regjeringen.no/en/dep/ud/press/news/2010/report_grameen.html?id=627366
Interest Rates
Another central charge made in the film is that Grameen Bank charges excessive interest rates. Specifically, the film in its Norwegian version accuses Grameen Bank of charging its borrowers annual interest rates of between 30% to 200%. This was and is factually incorrect. As an expert on microfinance, Alex Counts was interviewed by Mr. Heinemann on film about this issue, as was David Roodman, Senior Fellow of the Center for Global Development. Both specifically told Mr. Heinemann that his figures were wrong, but he ignored the corrections at that time. Hopefully this is corrected in this version of the film. Film interviews with Alex Counts and David Roodman show how their statements to Mr. Heinemann were willfully misrepresented in the film – for more information, see http://www.youtube.com/microfinanceresponse
In response to the unfounded assertions about interest rates in the film, Grameen Bank invited an independent expert, Chuck Waterfield of MicroFinance Transparency, to examine their rates, providing full access for that purpose. The MicroFinance Transparency report, dated January 4, 2011, is available at: http://www.mftransparency.org/pages/category/resources/pricing-certifications/. It shows, in particular, that the highest effective interest rate charged for Grameen Bank’s “basic loan” (the most expensive) is 22.84%. Other loans for higher education and housing attract substantially lower interest rates, and all loan products score an unprecedented 100% on the Transparency Index.
The Jobra Interview
The film seeks to portray Grameen Bank and Professor Yunus in a damaging light by way of interviews with individuals in Bangladesh, claiming that Professor Yunus made promises to them that were not kept, or that they have suffered in other ways at the hands of Grameen Bank due to high interest rates. The alleged suffering due to high interest rates is, as stated above, false. The film presents no real evidence to substantiate the other claims, and Professor Yunus refutes any claims made concerning him. Grameen Bank also denies such claims.
This element of the film is based on filmed interviews with individuals in Bangladesh, who are identified in the film and accompanied by commentary purporting to explain and clarify what it being said in Bangla by the interviewees. From our enquiries to date, it is evident that at least some of these interviews are not as represented in the film. For example, Mr. Heinemann claims to have interviewed the daughter of Professor Yunus’s original borrower, and, in the voiceover, claims that the original borrower died in deep poverty. After Mr. Heinemann’s film was aired on NRK Norway, an independent filmmaker, Ms. Gayle Ferraro, travelled to the place of the interview and found the person he interviewed. As can be seen from her film http://www.youtube.com/user/microfinanceresponse#p/a/u/0/1JGBQnrC-cw it turns out that the person Mr. Heinemann interviewed was not in fact who he claimed. In addition, Ms. Ferraro found that the woman who was the actual borrower described in Mr. Heinemann’s film was alive and well, and confirmed the true story of how she had been helped by Professor Yunus. Ms. Ferraro’s film shows that this part of Mr. Heinemann’s film is false.
It is surely not Grameen Bank’s or Professor Yunus’s intention to stifle debate on microfinance – indeed, the Bank, Prof. Yunus and Grameen Foundation all welcome healthy, balanced debate on the issues – but deliberate and repeated false and defamatory statements and unfounded attacks with intent to inflict harm and damage do not further that debate: they distort it. They feed sensationalism and confusion, and they damage the progress that they and all responsible microfinance institutions have made in helping millions of the world’s poorest citizens lift themselves from poverty. Some of the wider ramifications of this discussion are not for this letter, but are expressed in a recent article by Professor Yunus in the New York Times, which can be found at http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/15/opinion/15yunus.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=yunus&st=cse
You may not be aware that Grameen Bank is 95% owned by more than 8 million borrowers and members of the Grameen Bank in Bangladesh. About 4% is owned by the Government of Bangladesh. The borrowers and members of the Grameen bank are 97% women, who come from the poorest sectors of Bangladesh. To these people, Grameen Bank is a vital resource that enables them to improve the lives of themselves and their families. Attacks upon Grameen Bank directly harm the interests of these people.
Sunday, 19 December 2010
Friday, 3 December 2010
Fakta om hva som skjedde med Grameen og Yunus
Som en nær venn av Yunus gjennom 16 år har jeg god kjennskap til hvordan Yunus og Grameen opererer. Bildet som ble gitt i Brennpunkt dokumentaren «Fanget i mikrogjeld» gir et veldig ensidig bilde. Det Grameen Bank gjorde i 1998 var helt legitim om man ser på dokumentasjon fra Norad den 7/12 2010 og en forklaring fra Yunus senteret.
Pengene ble overført til Grameen Kalyan som så lånte dem direkte tilbake til Grameen Bank hvor midlene ble brukt til de formål de var ment for fra starten. Imidlertid førte transaksjonen til en viktig effekt: Grameen Bank betalt e 2% renter for pengene, og disse renteinntektene gjorde det mulig å bl.a. bygge en rekke helsesentre rundt i Bangladesh for bankens medlemmer. Denne virksomheten ble faktisk selværende etter en tid. Du kan lese mer om det i denne artikkelen fra frittstående forskere:
http://www.microcapital.org/microcapital-story-grameen-kalyan-offers-health-microinsurance-for-usd-173-per-year-and-partners-with-pfizer-inc-ge-healthcare-and-mayo-clinic-is-it-economically-viable/ Pengene ble altså brukt i tråd med forutsetningene fra NORAD, og det er IKKE snakk om at Yunus har tatt penger til andre formål enn avtalt, og han har ikke brutt noen form for revisjons regler heller. Dokumentaren gir et helt skjevt bilde av det som skjedde.
Effektiv rente i Grameen er maks 22% ikke 30% som det blir sagt i dokumentaren. Se mer om deres renter her: http://www.grameen.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=26&Itemid=175
Oppsummering om renter fra Grameens hjemmeside:
Low Interest Rates
Government of Bangladesh has fixed interest rate for government-run microcredit programmes at 11 per cent at flat rate. It amounts to about 22 per cent at declining basis. Grameen Bank's interest rate is lower than government rate.
There are four interest rates for loans from Grameen Bank : 20% for income generating loans, 8% for housing loans, 5% for student loans, and 0% (interest-free) loans for Struggling Members (beggars). All interests are simple interest, calculated on declining balance method. This means, if a borrower takes an income-generating loan of say, Tk 1,000, and pays back the entire amount within a year in weekly instalments, she'll pay a total amount of Tk 1,100, i.e. Tk 1,000 as principal, plus Tk 100 as interest for the year, equivalent to 10% flat rate.
Jeg har selv sett en rekke eksempler på bedring for folk i Bangladesh og andre steder etter at de har brukt mikrolån til å starte EGEN NÆRINGSVIRKSOMHET som bringer nye inntekter til personen. Poenget er at mikrofinans som brukes ukritisk til forbruk er ikke i tråd med intensjonene. Det kan sammenliknes med folk som handler over evne med kredittkort her hjemme. Det kan føre til gjeldskrise uansett om man bor i Norge eller i Bangladesh. Ideen med mikrofinans er at det skal være oppfølging av bruken av lånene, kursing/veiledning er også en del av konseptet. Uten denne delen kan mye gå galt. Det kan være sunt med en debatt om bruken av mikrofinans lån internasjonalt fordi enkelte missbruker konseptet, men det er ikke tilfelle med Grameen Bank. Debatt er sunt for også mikrofinans sektoren, men denne dokumentaren ga kun et ensidig bilde av situasjonen. Hadde den vært mer balansert ville seerne fått et helt annet og mer riktig inntrykk.
Pengene ble overført til Grameen Kalyan som så lånte dem direkte tilbake til Grameen Bank hvor midlene ble brukt til de formål de var ment for fra starten. Imidlertid førte transaksjonen til en viktig effekt: Grameen Bank betalt e 2% renter for pengene, og disse renteinntektene gjorde det mulig å bl.a. bygge en rekke helsesentre rundt i Bangladesh for bankens medlemmer. Denne virksomheten ble faktisk selværende etter en tid. Du kan lese mer om det i denne artikkelen fra frittstående forskere:
http://www.microcapital.org/microcapital-story-grameen-kalyan-offers-health-microinsurance-for-usd-173-per-year-and-partners-with-pfizer-inc-ge-healthcare-and-mayo-clinic-is-it-economically-viable/ Pengene ble altså brukt i tråd med forutsetningene fra NORAD, og det er IKKE snakk om at Yunus har tatt penger til andre formål enn avtalt, og han har ikke brutt noen form for revisjons regler heller. Dokumentaren gir et helt skjevt bilde av det som skjedde.
Effektiv rente i Grameen er maks 22% ikke 30% som det blir sagt i dokumentaren. Se mer om deres renter her: http://www.grameen.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=26&Itemid=175
Oppsummering om renter fra Grameens hjemmeside:
Low Interest Rates
Government of Bangladesh has fixed interest rate for government-run microcredit programmes at 11 per cent at flat rate. It amounts to about 22 per cent at declining basis. Grameen Bank's interest rate is lower than government rate.
There are four interest rates for loans from Grameen Bank : 20% for income generating loans, 8% for housing loans, 5% for student loans, and 0% (interest-free) loans for Struggling Members (beggars). All interests are simple interest, calculated on declining balance method. This means, if a borrower takes an income-generating loan of say, Tk 1,000, and pays back the entire amount within a year in weekly instalments, she'll pay a total amount of Tk 1,100, i.e. Tk 1,000 as principal, plus Tk 100 as interest for the year, equivalent to 10% flat rate.
Jeg har selv sett en rekke eksempler på bedring for folk i Bangladesh og andre steder etter at de har brukt mikrolån til å starte EGEN NÆRINGSVIRKSOMHET som bringer nye inntekter til personen. Poenget er at mikrofinans som brukes ukritisk til forbruk er ikke i tråd med intensjonene. Det kan sammenliknes med folk som handler over evne med kredittkort her hjemme. Det kan føre til gjeldskrise uansett om man bor i Norge eller i Bangladesh. Ideen med mikrofinans er at det skal være oppfølging av bruken av lånene, kursing/veiledning er også en del av konseptet. Uten denne delen kan mye gå galt. Det kan være sunt med en debatt om bruken av mikrofinans lån internasjonalt fordi enkelte missbruker konseptet, men det er ikke tilfelle med Grameen Bank. Debatt er sunt for også mikrofinans sektoren, men denne dokumentaren ga kun et ensidig bilde av situasjonen. Hadde den vært mer balansert ville seerne fått et helt annet og mer riktig inntrykk.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)