David Norris (Independent)

I am being greedy in taking seven or eight minutes while the remaining time will be shared between the Senators. I think it is five or six minutes and three minutes. I know the Leas-Chathaoirleach will be his usual flexible self.

I welcome the Minister of State, who is an old friend from the Oireachtas Committee on Foreign Affairs. I noticed that we were visited by a distinguished delegation led by the Chairman of that committee. I am not sure which countries were represented but it is good they came to the House.

I note some positive things in the Minister of State's speech, such as the acknowledgement of the need to move towards a goal of 0.7% of gross national product by 2012, given the disappointment of an earlier promise which was given categorically by the Taoiseach. At least, we are more or less on track, which I definitely welcome.

I remember when, during a meeting of the Oireachtas Committee of Foreign Affairs, Liz O'Donnell, who was a member of the Government at the time, said that the only way to copperfasten it was to legislate for it and put in an annual budget head. That is what is necessary if one is serious about it so let us do it. Let us not have pious conversation about it. We are at 0.5%, which is reasonably healthy. We expect to get to 0.6% by 2010 and 0.7% by 2012. I know the Minister of State will be on our side with regard to this but let us legislate for it. If we are serious about giving commitments, let us copperfasten them.

I also very much welcome the idea of a hunger task force. Of course, our aid has increased. It is about €800 million this year. We have an obligation to the Irish taxpayer to ensure we invest in the expertise which will allow us to administer it effectively. I am saying this following Hans Zomer from Dóchas which recently launched a very important series of documents just down the road from this House. We must monitor international trade agreements to ensure that the selfish northern countries do not, through their trade agreements, significantly undermine the money transferred from Irish taxpayers. There is not much point if it ends up in the pockets of multinationals.

I wish to raise the issue of corruption. I was astonished by the fact that there was not a single mention of it in the Minister of State's speech. In addition, there was no mention of it in the speech of the principal spokesman for the Opposition, although Senator Daly did make a glancing reference to it twice in his speech. However, they were glancing references and I think we must really look at the issue. The nine developing countries that have received most of our aid — in other words, taxpayers' money from this country — remain at the bottom of the scale measuring levels of corruption, although there have been some improvements. All but two of those programme countries nominated by Irish Aid, the Government's overseas development division, score less than three in Transparency International's Corruption Perceptions Index. This is a ghastly phenomenon and suggests we should get as much money as possible directly to NGOs, particularly to people like Mr. John O'Shea and Mr. Niall Mellon, who builds houses in South Africa. As an Irish person I am proud of that and we know that every penny goes directly to helping people, which is not the case with the hundreds of millions siphoned off by corrupt dictators for their floozies, mistresses, arms and toys for big boys. That is not why we pay tax in this country.

If we are serious we can ratify the UN Convention against Corruption. I understand we have not done so and I ask the Minister of State to give a commitment to ratifying the convention or else a convincing reason why we have not done so. We must publish that legislation within the term of this Parliament.

We should also adopt the UN human rights norms for business guidelines, which we have not done. We should push for an international convention to end banking secrecy. This allows these blackguards to squirrel their money away in numbered bank accounts in respectable European countries such as Switzerland. As a compliant tax payer, who has just shelled out €20,000 in preliminary tax returns, I do not want to see it in Mobutu Sese Seko's bank account in Geneva. I object to that. We seek better governance and should help those who improve. Those who do not should not receive a penny. Instead, the money should be distributed through agencies such as GOAL and Mr. Niall Mellon.

We should support the extractive industry's transparency initiative and the publish what you pay initiatives. Many of these countries in Africa have major natural resources and are being exploited in the interest of dictators and multinationals. We are entitled to know what is happening. It is a filthy thing when we see leaders taking money from the poorest and the most disadvantaged, money to which these groups are entitled. This has major consequences and means disease, lack of water and the capacity to survive on this planet. The sums involved are enormous, hundreds of millions and up to €15 billion in some cases. This is inappropriate. We need to set up clean water systems.

There is major embezzlement and extortion by officials, weak financial administration and no accountability in these recipient countries. Mr. Martin Meredith, one of the shrewdest observers of Africa points out that of 53 countries in Africa, only South Africa and Botswana are better off now than under colonial rule, an appalling indictment. The African Union acknowledges that $148 billion is lost to corruption. Why are we feeding this corruption? It is like pouring petrol on flames.

The US Senate established a committee that reported its findings in a study in 2004 that the World Bank has lost $1 billion of funds slated for development in the worlds poorest countries since 1946. This amounts to a 20% bleed-off of its lending portfolio to keep these corrupt people. Mr. Paul Wolfowitz attempted to do something, as did Mr. Hilary Benn, who called for an international framework. At the instigation of people like Bono, the G8 is increasing aid by $50 million but Mr. Hilary Benn, who I know, states that it is hard to see how this bonanza will help to eradicate poverty unless governments on the continent are serious about fighting corruption.

I suggest a few ideas. Can a government that signally fails to guarantee the wellbeing of its citizens be trusted with our money when we know it is on the take? We are aware of it. In November 2006, the Department of Foreign Affairs acknowledged to the Committee of Public Accounts that dealing with corrupt governments of countries such as Ethiopia and Uganda was "not ideal", a phrase that keeps cropping up. It is the diplomatic term for "completely rotten". In May, the audit committee of the Department of Foreign Affairs highlighted the absence of a clear fraud policy in the Department. We should have one.

Deputy Michael Noonan, then Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee, stated on 2 June that it would be considered inadvisable to accept the audit of a government of sub-Saharan Africa. Let us deal with Ethiopia and Uganda, counties that are a byword for scandal. We gave €29 million and €32 million respectively to these countries. Do we know where it went? We know where a significant proportion of it went. This disgraces the wonderful work of Father Shay Cullen and Mr. Tom Hyland, who I am proud to call a friend. I brought him to the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs but we are letting down these people. I am astonished there was no mention of corruption in the speech of the Minister of State.