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

I am very supportive of the transformative and life-saving work in which Irish Aid is involved. If any message goes out from this committee today it should be that aid does work. The biggest danger is apathy, ignorance and people believing that no matter how much money is pumped into these areas, in terms of outcomes, it still comes back to the problems of famine and so on. It is vital that we continue to reinforce that message, particularly to taxpayers who are paying a considerable amount of money.

The biggest concern I would have is about our lack of understanding of where the money is being spent and our lack of oversight and scrutiny of many of the programmes. Deputy Maureen O'Sullivan asked about the European Development Fund, EDF. That is one of the areas about which we would have a concern. I would like to hear some suggestions as to how this committee can improve oversight of that. We need to be confident enough to be able to sell the idea of the work Irish Aid is doing abroad to our constituents and to those who are opposed to the idea. There has been widespread party and non-party support for it in the House. Now and then, someone will make the argument that we should be spending the money on people at home such as the homeless, people who go to go bed hungry and so on. We need to have that confidence and examine ways to have that oversight.

In terms of the current system, the Minister might come before the committee every so often. At budget time, we go through the figures and have a discussion on them. I do not know if my colleagues share this view but that does not give us a sense of the position.

I am also conscious that fewer politicians travel to see many of the programmes. There is no political benefit as such for people who travel. They get it in the neck from journalists and others back home who say that they stay in such and such a hotel. It is important that all of us who are supportive of the idea of overseas development aid, ODA, are on the same page on it.

On the EDF, Ireland provides a significant amount of EDF funding. It represents 5% of overall ODA funding. It does not have to be today but we need to consider providing information on the areas where EDF is spent, how it is allocated and what it is spent on. Considering it is funded by all EU members, how are decisions on spending made? What influence does Ireland have in that process?

In terms of ODA, there appears to be a shift from bilateral spending to multilateral spending. I understand that 47% of our ODA is multilateral funding. I understand also that in times of humanitarian crises, basket funding is needed to tackle major health issues. The witness mentioned Ebola, malaria, HIV, AIDS and so on but is the bilateral element being downgraded? If that is the case, the witnesses might explain the reason. A number of the partner countries speak positively about our bilateral programmes because of the partnership approach we use, but it is no longer mentioned as frequently.

There seems to be a trend towards a reduction in aid to the least developed countries, LDCs. Ireland's contribution to LDCs is below the United Nations target of 0.15% of gross national income, GNI, in 2016. Given that people are still suffering from extreme poverty in those countries, how is Irish Aid working to address that?

The global footprint was touched on by other speakers. Libya was raised as an issue, and it is related to ODA. The reports in that regard are disturbing. The committee met representatives of Médecins sans Frontières, doctors without borders, during the week and heard about human rights abuses and so on. The witnesses are aware of people's concerns in that regard including people being returned to the Libyan coast guard and detention centres. Last year, Ireland provided €600,000 to the EU Africa trust fund for migration. I am not sure how that money is spent or on what it is spent. Does anyone go to Libya? Do we have any involvement in Libya?

In regard to Turkey, according to the Irish Aid Annual Report 2016, €5 million was allocated to the European Commission Turkey refugee facility. Again, I have no idea what that is spent on or if any other members know that. I have spoken out repeatedly in the Chamber, and in this body, about the refugee deal with Turkey, which is described as a country of safe origin. That could not be further from the truth in view of what is going on, but what is the money spent on there?

My last question is on the way this committee can improve the oversight. Reference was made at the outset to the members of the African diaspora, and probably members of diasporas who were involved in other countries. Is there a way of tying in that experience with the ODA work? People are on the telephone all the time and information goes back and forth but there is no structure in that regard. Similarly, in terms of those Deputies and Senators who travel to see the programmes, there is no formal structure for them to report back on their experiences. A report is given but there is no engagement or formal interaction with the witnesses. Would the witnesses see that as a positive way to move on matters? That is not a criticism but in terms of their impressions and so on, that is important. It would mean that the Deputy, the Senator or people who are going on those trips would feel that the work they are doing is being acknowledged but also that there is some feedback or communication between them and the witnesses.