Seán Crowe (Dublin South West, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

The big question arising in regard to Colombia is how the clauses built into an agreement are triggered when breaches occur. The difficulty is that there is no mechanism within any of the agreements which render them null and void when breaches occur.

I welcome that there has been no reduction in the gross allocation to overseas development aid, ODA. I welcome also that only 6% of the total Vote is being allocated for administrative costs, which is relatively low by international standards. I compliment the Department in that regard. I note a slight increase in the provision for salaries. There is supposed to be close monitoring of salaries and so on.

I note €10.05 million is being allocated for bilateral assistance and spending, which is a 3% reduction, and an increase in multilateral spending to €8.85 million, which is 31% increase. Is there any significant reason for this large increase? Many of us are of the view that bilateral assistance in the context of overseas development aid is the cornerstone of Irish Aid. We are told partner countries like to work with Ireland because it is seen as a fair and critical partner with no colonial baggage and so on. I am concerned that this is a policy shift. The Minister of State might comment on that.

Some €600,000 is being provided to meet the cost of implementation of the Africa strategy. Can the Minister of State confirm that Irish Aid will continue its work in this area? I note €1 million is provided for international emergency assistance. I welcome the increase in that regard. In regard to multilateral assistance, I am concerned that Ireland's anticipated contribution to the European Development Fund in 2015, when compared with the contribution for 2014, has significantly increased. As stated earlier, it is easy to monitor bilateral aid. However, when it comes to monitoring of multilateral aid money often goes astray, which a cause of concern. Reference was made earlier to the Uganda situation. The larger a programme the greater the likelihood of money going astray.

Deputy Maureen O'Sullivan referred earlier to the joint monitoring team in Tanzania. The message from the MEPs with whom we have met is that they would like to know where the money is going. That makes sense. It also raises the profile in regard to the work we are doing. It is important there is an awareness of Ireland's activities in terms of supporting particular countries and the sacrifices being made in this regard by the people in Ireland. That makes sense all around. I am interested in hearing the Minister of State's response to the lack of oversight and transparency in regard to the European Development Fund, EDF. The allocation for multilateral assistance includes spending of €1.6 million in payments to support trade related capacity building initiatives within developing countries. The concern in this regard is that again the focus is on trade.

Our job is to review expenditure. We expect countries we are supporting to do this but, as a Parliament, we are not doing it. However, that is a discussion for another day. Perhaps it is the case that I am not familiar enough with the structures of the committee but would it be possible to hold additional private meetings during which the expenditure is outlined more fully to members such that we are confident enough to be able to go out and sell it. That is important in the context of the support for ODA.

Despite current experiences in Ireland there is huge support for what we are doing internationally. I commend the Department in that regard. I have nothing but admiration for many of the programmes in this area. The work done in the hospital in Tanzania was amazing. We need to ensure there is in place a structure which enables us to feed ideas and concerns to those involved in foreign or European affairs or other groups travelling abroad. That should be encouraged.