Shane Ross (Independent)

I wish to speak fairly favourably about the Government's overseas development aid programme. I pay tribute to various people who contributed so strongly towards it. While I welcome the Minister of State's arrival to this House, it is only appropriate to pay tribute to his predecessor who did so much and committed so much of his time and idealism towards the goal of Irish aid increasing towards a much higher percentage of gross national product. I am proud of the fact that we are approaching the 0.7% level to which we have aspired for so long. The previous Minister of State should get great credit for that. The fact that we are giving €800 million per annum towards Third World aid is particularly commendable.

It is somewhat depressing that there was no reference in the Minister of State's speech to the real criteria being used by the Government to distribute aid. He said that the aid is for the relief of poverty and it is concentrated on sub-Saharan Africa, but I would like to know the criteria being used beyond that, beyond the relief of poverty, and what types of regimes the Government is prepared to support and what types it is not. In other words, what criteria for the administration of democracy are being used? It is easy enough to give money towards the relief of poverty but it is very important that the money goes into the right hands.

In saying that, it is right to pay great tribute to certain organisations which in the past have been champions not only of the relief of poverty but also of the fact that Irish money goes into the hands of those who are committed to democracy. I do not believe it has been mentioned but I believe it is appropriate to pay tribute to John O'Shea of GOAL. One of the great virtues of GOAL and John O'Shea was that he pointed out, to the great embarrassment of successive Governments, that money may be going towards the relief of poverty but it was going through the hands of tyrants at the time and that it was not getting into the hands of those whom we wished it to get to. That may have been difficult for Governments at the time but it served an enormous purpose.

I ask, especially in regard to sub-Saharan Africa, about which we are talking, that the Government carefully examines the giving of aid to countries such as Uganda, about which GOAL pointed out that the emperor had no clothes, in other words, that the tyrant who ran Uganda was not fully committed to democracy or that the money was not going to the right place. It is appropriate we continue to ensure the money that is going to Zimbabwe via the United Nations does not find itself in the hands of the tyrannical regime of Robert Mugabe. I know it is very difficult to draw that particular dividing line in determining whether this money is to go towards the relief of poverty or to the person in charge. Nonetheless it is a definitive line which the Government should look at very carefully. By holding the money back, one may well be contributing to the increase of poverty or making lives more miserable. On the other hand, keeping the money going may, in effect, perpetuate the regime of those ruling in that particular country, even by going through the United Nations.

It is also very appropriate to pay tribute, as several Senators have done, to those Irish missionaries in particular who have done so much for the relief of poverty and the promotion of education. It is immensely fashionable these days to knock the Roman Catholic Church for reasons which are often peripheral to its main activities. It is only fair to say that its representatives have done immense humane work. I think of the Philippines, Africa and the whole world, not least in the area of education, which the Minister of State mentioned in his speech. It would be wrong not to pay tribute to those people who have contributed from that particular area. Trócaire, too, should be mentioned in passing as it is after all a Catholic Church-inspired organisation.

I ask the Minister of State in his reply perhaps to speak somewhat more about the measures he is taking to ensure corrupt regimes do not receive Irish aid. I ask him to clarify whether he is certain, even if the aid is going through the United Nations, it is not contributing to sustaining corrupt regimes and that it is going to the right people and the relief of the poverty he so rightly wants to tackle. It would be churlish and wrong not to say we are proud of the record of this country now in its contribution to the Third World. It should, however, be remembered that Third World countries are not always ruled by governments which have the interests of their people at heart.