Ms Lorna Gold:

Deputies Mitchell and Crowe raised the complexity of policy coherence for development. Where do we start with it? We acknowledge its complexity and the fact that it is cross-departmental makes it a complex and entrenched issue to get traction on. Where other countries have been successful is in prioritising, and we are lucky to have the huge study that was commissioned in 2009 and again in 2011 with recommendations. Trinity College has done the hard work in terms of identifying where the difficult issues lie. This committee could play a key role in prioritising one or two key issues where there is a demonstrated policy incoherence that is core to the mandate of the committee and bringing in the relevant people from the Department or interdepartmental committee. It could even carry out its own research to drill down into where incoherence exists.

It might be a good idea to look at where other governments have got this right. I do not know if the joint committee has the scope to invite representatives of a committee in another country that has coherence policy to learn how they address this policy. No country is perfect at it, but some countries put in place institutional processes to facilitate it. I appreciate it is very difficult, especially given the limited resources and the way that things are currently set up. Trócaire has done research on this and we will be launching it in the coming week. We will invite the members of this committee and others to a round table discussion on the institutional frameworks for policy coherence in the near future.

In response to questions on the effectiveness of aid and our evaluations of the aid, I know from Trócaire's perspective, and that of other organisations that are recipients of Irish Aid funding, we are obliged to produce regular evaluations and an annual report to Irish Aid which is based on a results-based framework. This looks at the impact of our work across the world and is very detailed in its analysis. It is available to anybody who would like to look at it. We are getting much better at looking at how we monitor our impact as opposed to the outcomes of the work we do.

There is an international process - I am not sure if members are aware of it - around aid effectiveness. Senator Walsh talked about the multiple actors engaged in aid in different countries and it can seem incoherent and there is a lack of collaboration and harmonisation of policies. This issue has been acknowledged by the OECD as far back as the early 2000s but since the late noughties there has been a process to improve aid effectiveness on a number of different levels such as lead countries, lead agencies on different thematic issues and in different geographic areas. Irish Aid could discuss the intergovernmental process around that. As development NGOs we are involved in a parallel process which links in with a set of principles called the Buisán principles which are about how NGOs will in a sense improve our own effectiveness. This is internationally agreed. Hans Zomer has been involved in the process and when Mr. Justin Kilcullen retires from Trócaire he will take up a role as ambassador around improving aid effectiveness across the world in civil society organisations.

Deputy Crowe raised the issue of inequality in the post-2015 framework. We are bringing this to the fore in relation to the framework. At present there are no goals but the high level panel report proposes a target of zero in the number of people living on $1 a day. That would be an improvement of 50% on what was set in the millennium development goals but as he said, people live on $2 and $4. When we start to move towards the higher level we get into the bigger issue of global inequalities and how one addresses the sustainability around the universal framework. Where does one draw the line in terms of the post-2015 global framework? My view is that we need to set universal goals that are indicative but individual countries have a right to set their own goals. What is applicable to India might not be applicable in terms of a goal in sub-Saharan Africa. There needs to be flexibility. The millennium development goals were never intended to go down to the national level, they were to be set as a global level framework. I think they have learned there needs to be flexibility around the framework. Likewise, Ireland should have its goals. We need to have our own goals that are indicative along the lines of what comes after the millennium development goals but they need to be appropriate to the Irish context. My colleague, Mr. McCaughey, will address other issues.