Mark Daly (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I thank the representatives from Irish Aid for the detailed presentation. Deputy O'Sullivan spoke on the issue of the UN and the EU and how much of our overseas aid budget actually goes directly to them. The issue is really over the control. Members often receive memos about aid programmes that Ireland has signed up for under the EU. We hand over the cheque and Ireland's control of the funding dissipates. Clearly there is an advantage to having scale and in Ireland partnering with organisations such as Trócaire and Concern. During the time of the austerity budgets, however, Ireland was so committed and tied in to giving X amount of money to different EU programmes that the actual amount of money over which Ireland had discretion dropped substantially. The figure at one stage was some 46% of all our overseas aid budget being sent to the EU. Between the UN budget and the EU budget where is that figure at and how much is left? I believe the Secretary General spoke of two thirds, which is €486 million, as the figure over which Ireland had discretion. I would like to clarify that.

I will now turn to the issue of fraud. Given the circumstances under which Ireland works in partnering with developing countries and their systems there is always the risk and likelihood of fraud. How much of Ireland's budget gets lost in fraud? It is a risk and an outcome we are all well aware of as likely to happen. On an annual basis, how much do we lose to that in hard figure terms?

I thank Mr. de Búrca for answering the question on trade and human rights. A concern was raised at this committee numerous times relating to the Colombian trade agreement. While there is a human rights mechanism also in the trade agreement with the EU and Israel, there is no way of actually triggering that mechanism that we can see. What does a country have to do to lose its trade agreements with the EU or lose its aid from the EU? Apparently there is no enforcement of the mechanism, and that keeps happening especially in the area of trade where for every $1 of aid, $3 is lost to African and developing countries through the trade practices of the EU, the United States of America and others.

Mr. de Búrca made reference to consulates, embassies and the footprint around Africa, which I welcome. The Taoiseach has also spoken about expanding Ireland's consulates. Ireland's consulate network is part of this committee's work programme. I had engagement with the Secretary General and with our consulate section where we looked at how consulates and honorary consulates are appointed. We discussed the issue of the United States of America and Canada. Given the Taoiseach's announcement of increasing Ireland's footprint in this regard, could the Department come back to the committee with the plan for which countries are being decided? I do not want to know how it is decided, just which countries will have honorary consulates over the next ten years, even though they may not happen. I know of the process where the ambassador tells the Secretary General that they need someone in their region. Without a plan, that approach is too ad hocfor the vision that I am sure the Department has in the context of where we need people now, in places we did not have them before. This has been on the work programme for as long as I have been here, but it will remain. With regard to the Taoiseach's announcement, we would like to see from the Department the plan for where the consulates are going to be placed. I came across an example recently-----