Maureen O'Sullivan (Dublin Central, Independent) | Oireachtas source

The review process is welcome and positive. We saw what happened when we had the review of Irish Aid in terms of the engagement by people and the fruitful discussions that took place.

My first question is on the lack of policy coherence between the Department of Foreign Affairs and the Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources on the matter of biofuels. We know that biofuels are undermining food security and that they are having major negative effects on food production. That is at a time when Ireland is extremely supportive of aid to reduce poverty and hunger. The Minister of State, Deputy Costello, told me some months ago that Ireland was supporting the 5% figure in that regard. The Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Deputy Rabbitte, appears to have moved to the 7% figure. The European Commission is supporting the 5% figure, with the European Union Parliaments supporting the 6% figure. It appears that Ireland will take the 7% figure because the view is that this is the lowest that can be achieved. That is not good enough. I ask the Minister to discuss that with the Minister, Deputy Rabbitte, to the effect that Ireland will support the 5% figure at the meeting on 12 December.

Second, as a member of this committee and as chair of the Irish section of UEPA I made two visits abroad recently. One was to Ghana, with the Chairman, and the other was to Mozambique from where I returned this morning. I compliment and acknowledge the work of the two ambassadors, Paddy Fay and Ruairi de Burca, and their staffs for the way in which they are presenting Ireland and enhancing our reputation not just on a diplomatic level but also with civil society and with groups in the two respective countries. What comes across is that Ireland's reputation is second to none, certainly in Ghana where we saw major interest in pursuing business interests with Ireland.

The Mozambique visit was in regard to aid effectiveness and parliamentary oversight about which we could be much more positive. There is a definite lack of knowledge in African countries on aid in general in terms of where it is coming from, where it is going and the amounts. We know what we are giving here because we have transparency and accountability but the Department of Foreign Affairs, with Irish Aid, could be more progressive on that by meeting members of the budget committees where they exist because some Parliaments do not have budget committees or finance committees. Opposition parties certainly do not know the amount of aid going in. There was a general meeting in Johannesburg of quite a number of the African parliamentarians at which we pushed the idea that there would be a debate in African Parliaments on aid because there is not doubt that there is a change in the aid relationship. It is no longer the case that we are just the giver and they are the receivers. There is much more of a partnership in that regard and because of Ireland's reputation, I believe we can do very well with African countries. We know the resources they have compared to us.

It was interesting that because there are tensions in Mozambique we had requests from opposition parliamentarians that Ireland would engage in facilitating discussion between the two parties, such was Ireland's reputation, and that Irish Aid would meet the members of the committees and opposition leaders to ensure they would know exactly what is going on.

My third point, and Latin America was mentioned, is on Colombia. There are major human rights issues in Colombia, particularly regarding trade unionists and community activists. Trade agreement talks are taking place. Ireland must commit to human rights being very much part of any trade agreement.