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

These motions are presented to us in a way that is totally positive and suggest this will be a wonderful success. Page 7 of the Caribbean agreements refers to the positive EPA effect for some agricultural and industrial exports from the Dominican Republic and some other projects. That does not come across as a glaring success of what is happening in the Caribbean. In the previous Dáil, the now President, Michael D. Higgins, was most critical of EPAs and the lack of debate in the Parliament on them. We should have a full and frank debate in the Dáil on these issues.

Deputy Durkan spoke about how people in west Africa feel about this. There was an open letter from west African farmers to the European Parliament. Another document was produced an amalgamation of NGOs, called CONCORD. The common concerns coming from them was that instead of lifting people out of poverty it will plunge them further into poverty, which will lead in turn to further migration to Europe; that there will be massive impacts on local markets and on long-term food security; and, very significantly, that it will undermine our development aid programme. We were discussing climate change this morning where we seem to be giving with one hand and taking with the other because of our lack of real commitment on climate change. I think there is a further element of that with these EPAs.

We know the saying that to give a person a fish allows them to feed for a day but teaching them how to fish or giving them a boat has potential. Cynically one could say it would be a lost opportunity for the home base. Therefore, how serious are we with helping Africa to feed itself and lift itself out of poverty?

The letters from the west African farmers and from civil society make us wonder why we are not on the same side as those people in addressing these issues. Is there something significant in the fact that the most populous of the west African countries, Nigeria, has not signed this yet? The EU Commission is carrying out a trade policy review but EPAs do not seem to come under that review.

Page 11 refers to the final provisions which sound vague and woolly. The Minister of State said that there would be a revision clause providing for it to be assessed or reviewed every five years while also allowing review as required. Is there not a need for much more stringent monitoring of this? We know it will pass here. Where is the role for this committee in such monitoring? Will the Minister of State come back here on that one?

The Taoiseach has said that developing countries across the world have a growing thirst for dairy products, especially infant formula. However, much of the milk powder that we export is fat filled, meaning that the valuable cream has been extracted and has been replaced with cheaper vegetable fats. It is also taking from those programmes, including Scaling Up Nutrition, that promote breast feeding, which has been found to have the potential to reduce deaths in infants by double-figure percentages. This is where I see the contradiction. That is just one small example. If we go into it further, we could see other contradictions.

There are very serious concerns here. I do not think the safeguards are sufficiently rigid or stringent. Much more active oversight is needed.

On the Caribbean agreement, I do not know whether Cuba wants to be part of it, but I presume the embargo is preventing it from even being there.