Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We are meeting with the Minister of State, Deputy Costello, to discuss the meetings of the Foreign Affairs Council on development aid and One World, One Future, which was launched last month and which outlines Ireland's policy for international development. I would like to extend a warm welcome to the Minister of State and his officials to today's meeting. He was a very important member of this committee at one stage.

The new policy was developed following a review, which took place last year, of the White Paper on Irish Aid. This review, which was led by the Minister of State, with independent oversight by the Irish Aid expert group, chaired by Ms Nora Owen, was extensive in that it met with more than 1,000 people in both Ireland and the partner countries. It received 165 written submissions. While Ireland's aid programme is one of the best in the world, there is a clear need to recognise that in an ever-changing world, there is often a need to refocus our aims in order to ensure that the countries with which we work and support graduate to a position in which they are no longer dependent on aid. To that aim, the new policy has three goals, namely, reduced hunger and stronger resilience, sustainable development and inclusive economic growth, and better governance, human rights and accountability. In addition, six priority areas for action are identified: global hunger, fragile states, climate change and development, trade and economic growth, essential services, human rights and accountability.

This committee was involved in the review in a number of ways. First, the review was discussed before the joint committee on a number of occasions in 2011 and 2012. Second, the committee made a written submission to the review. Finally, individual members and political parties also made written submissions. The development meeting in May covered a number of very important issues. It adopted conclusions on EU overseas development assistance, resilience, and the 11th European development fund on food and nutritional security. It also endorsed conclusions on the post-2015 development framework in advance of the special event which Ireland is facilitating in September at the UN to review the millennium development goals. Final conclusions, which include both developmental and environmental elements post-2015, were adopted at the General Affairs Council yesterday and these have been circulated to the committee. In its EU work programme for 2013, the committee selected the post-2015 development framework as a priority.

I welcome this opportunity to hear from the Minister of State about the conclusions adopted in this area and about the special event that is being organised for September 2013. I invite the Minister of State to make his comments.

Joe Costello (Dublin Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is always good to be back. I would like to join with those expressing good wishes to Senator Norris. It is always a shock to hear about these things. I would also like to thank Martin Groves and welcome Brian Hickey to the committee.

I welcome the opportunity today to brief the committee on the Government's new policy for international development, One World, One Future, and to debrief it on the discussions at the development segment of the Foreign Affairs Council last May which marked the culmination of over one year of planning for Ireland's Presidency of the Council of the European Union. I propose to begin by outlining the new development policy and then to proceed to the Council conclusions which are the outcome of our priorities for the Presidency.

The 2011 programme for Government included a commitment to review the White Paper on Irish Aid. The review entailed a comprehensive period of reflection, listening and learning. It sought to examine the progress made by the aid programme over the past six years and to review the changing context in Ireland and overseas in which we operate. The review aimed to establish clear priorities to guide the Government's overseas aid programme in the years ahead. The review reached more than 1,000 people, as the Chairman mentioned, directly through public consultation meetings throughout the country and overseas. Over 160 written submissions were received, including from members of this committee and the parties they represent. The review involved meetings with NGOs, the private sector and other interested groups in Ireland and was discussed in this committee, the Oireachtas Joint Committee on European Affairs and the Seanad on several occasions. I thank those who participated in the review and made it such a vibrant process. I also acknowledge the Irish Aid expert advisory group chaired by Nora Owen, a former Minister for Justice, and I thank her for the important independent and oversight role that she and her committee played in the review.

Due to the extensive and systematic nature of this review I am confident that our new policy, One World, One Future, presents a clear direction for Ireland's role in international development in the years ahead. First and foremost, this new policy sets out a framework to guide our thematic engagement in development over the coming years, a framework that will help bring greater coherence to our work and better enable us to plan for, and measure more comprehensively, the results our development efforts are achieving. Through our vision we are clear about the bigger picture and about what we as a member of the international community are ultimately contributing towards. To reach our three goals we have identified six priority areas for action around which we will plan and manage our resources. Our core values of accountability, human rights, equality, coherence, sustainability, partnership, effectiveness, and results will underpin those plans. We have a single vision, three goals and six implementation measures in a document that is 36 pages long and therefore is ready for action rather than gathering dust on a shelf.

Achieving food and nutritional security is now centre stage in our thematic framework in light of the leading role we have played on hunger globally. Recognising the multidimensional nature of poverty and hunger, we are placing greater emphasis on the interconnections between the different priority areas for action. Within this policy framework we are also signalling an evolution in our approach by increasing our focus on responding to situations of what we call fragility - that is, conflict and post-conflict situations - giving even more attention to human rights and climate change and ensuring that greater emphasis is laid on promoting inclusive and equitable economic growth. In responding to crises in Syria and Mali over recent months and examining the statistics on progress towards the millennium development goals, MDGs, a greater focus on situations of fragility is an imperative. Our commitment includes the announcement that Sierra Leone has been designated a new key partner country for the Government. Also central to this is how best to link relief, recovery and development. Over time we will examine how best to increase our overall engagement with countries experiencing instability and fragility.

Human rights have always been of central importance to our foreign policy, but by committing to re-energise our approach in this area we are stating clearly that matters of non-discrimination, empowerment, accountability, participation and equality must be at the heart of all our development efforts. In many respects the human rights agenda is about protecting and empowering the most vulnerable. We will now work towards increasing our response to disability and further addressing the root causes of gender inequality, an issue that will be dealt with across our six priority areas for action. Another area that will receive greater attention is climate change, perhaps the most pressing issue facing poor countries today. Achieving the balance between the economic, social and environmental pillars of sustainable development is now critical. In addition, the new policy emphasises that in our pursuit of poverty reduction we need to attach greater importance to supporting inclusive economic growth by promoting trade, jobs and development in the private sector and the ability of developing countries to finance their own development.

Building on the agenda set by the Department's Africa strategy, we recognise that now is the time to engage in more rounded partnerships with Africa. A small but significant change in this regard is how we refer to countries with which we work closely. These are now no longer programme countries but key partner countries. Bearing in mind the different circumstances and stages of development in the nine partner countries, where appropriate we must seize the opportunity to increase trade and investment opportunities for Irish companies. Through the Department and its embassies across Africa and Vietnam and in close co-operation with Enterprise Ireland and other agencies and business associations, we have committed ourselves to helping with the research, the networking and the groundwork that can identify and facilitate two-way trade and investment between Ireland and Africa. As the Minster for Foreign Affairs and Trade said at the launch of this policy, this will be good for our partner countries and it will also be good for us.

Moving beyond the policy framework which governs what we do, One World, One Future also signals changes in the way we do things. We are clear in this policy that aid alone will not solve the problems of poverty and hunger. Our contribution is not just financial, through the assistance we provide; we also have a strong voice on the international stage which we will continue to use. We have in Ireland a clear capacity in our people and institutions which we will harness. We already have important partnerships with Irish research institutions, the Irish Human Rights Commission and others and in this new policy we signal a volunteering initiative which we will bring to fruition over the coming months. This initiative will modernise the way we support volunteering, including the compilation of a database of volunteers to provide better quality information on potential placements, including with NGOs and the United Nations, which will harness the experience of Irish people and institutions to the benefit of institutions in developing countries. Importantly, the policy recognises strongly our ability to contribute to good development outcomes not just through our foreign policy but also through policies right across Government. That is why this policy applies to all Departments and commits to strengthening the whole-of-government approach. This will include improving the workings of the interdepartmental committee on development and, with it, the submission of a biennial report to the Oireachtas on progress made in addressing policy incoherence and promoting greater collaboration across Government. It must also be recognised, however, that this new policy has been formulated in very difficult circumstances in Ireland and across Europe. In 2013, however, it reflects a huge commitment by the Government to ensure overseas development assistance remains an important policy priority and that this is reflected in annual budgetary allocations.

We have recognised that our spending on overseas aid must be fully transparent, providing maximum value for money and delivering positive results in the lives of those whom it is targeting. Accountability will be central to this, and we have set out clearly in this policy to whom we are accountable, and how.

In particular, we will also be encouraging even greater partnership and oversight by the Oireachtas in all that we do, including through engagement with this committee. We will also continue to demand high standards from those through whom we channel aid funding, namely NGOs, multilateral organisations, key partner country governments and others. In this regard, we will continue to work with partners that have a proven ability to deliver high-quality programmes and that deliver results for poor communities. Our partnership with Irish-based NGOs, with Irish missionary groups and with Irish institutions, including in the area of education, will remain an important dimension of the programme and will have a particular emphasis on demonstrating value for money and delivering results.

We will also focus on increasing public engagement with the aid programme and identifying ways by which the diaspora groups from developing countries can contribute their knowledge and experience in a manner that benefits the aid programme. The implementation of this policy will help us to focus on where we can make the most difference and will rationalise our efforts in that regard. Over the coming months we will work on the implementation plans necessary to put our new policy into action. I propose to retrace my steps on the consultation process and will be travelling to Cork and Limerick. We are very anxious to hear the views of the committee on the implementation process for our new policy. A broad-based consultation process was carried out and we want similar input from those who made proposals about the new policy. We also want to hear their views on how it will be implemented. If members have an opportunity over the summer to think about the matter, either individually or as a committee, it would be much appreciated.

This new policy will mark the beginning of a fresh chapter in Ireland's international development aid. We begin this chapter with the confidence that there is much to build on, including a strong commitment in Irish society, at all levels, to making a difference in the lives of the poorest and most vulnerable people with whom we work.

I will now deal with the development segment of the Foreign Affairs Council which I attended in Brussels on 28 May. The meeting was attended by Ministers of the 28 member states, including Croatia, the development and environment Commissioners, Mr. Piebalgs and Mr. Potočnik, and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Catherine Ashton. The development Council meets only once in each Presidency and so marks, to a large degree, the culmination of the Presidency’s efforts in the area of international development co-operation. It was with this in mind that we agreed with the High Representative, as Chair of the Council, to schedule the development Council late in Ireland’s Presidency and to convene the meeting as a stand-alone half-day session on 28 May. This allowed Ireland, in its role of Presidency, to work with the EEAS to prepare a substantive agenda for the meeting and provided EU development Ministers with significantly more time to discuss agenda items in full. This is the first occasion in the history of the Council conclusions that a separate day has been set aside to deal with the development sector of the Foreign Affairs Council conclusions.

The main issue in the international development agenda is a replacement for the millennium development goals, which were agreed in 2000 and are due to expire in 2015. Establishing a new development framework is crucial and this is reflected in the intensity and range of discussions taking place across the world, in the European Union, at the high-level panel appointed by the UN Secretary General, at the UN open working group on the sustainable development goals and at the 11 thematic and 50 or more country dialogues being organised by the UN across the world. We identified at an early stage in our preparations for the Presidency that EU engagement in this global discussion was essential and that Ireland, as holder of the Presidency during this crucial period, would be well placed to shape and focus the EU’s position, particularly with regard to the UN special event on the millennium development goals in September. The special event will be one of the last opportunities for international leaders to review progress being made in advance of the 2015 target date and will be a starting point for considering what will happen after 2015. Working with the EU High Representative, the Irish Presidency negotiated a coherent and effective EU position on what a post-2015 framework might be. The position was endorsed by EU development and environment Ministers before finally being adopted this week at the General Affairs Council, which was chaired by the Tánaiste. The EU position sets out the important building blocks that the EU considers essential for a robust and ambitious framework, while at the same time signalling that we are willing to engage with our partners to understand their views with the aim of working together to build consensus.

In May last year, the development Council welcomed the new EU development policy proposed by the Commission, namely, Agenda for Change. One year on we reviewed at Council how the EU’s new policy has been implemented over the past year. Discussions focused on a paper jointly prepared by the Commission and the EEAS which noted progress in accountability, the concentration of EU development assistance in programming, the next multi-annual financial framework period from 2014 to 2020, and budget support. The paper also noted that following discussions in partner countries, EU joint programming will begin in an additional 36 countries, bringing to over 40 the number of countries in which EU joint programming will be operational before the end of 2016. From the outset, Ireland has been a strong supporter of the direction of the Agenda for Change policy. Much of the provisions correlate closely with our own development policy, particularly the commitments to the eradication of poverty, tackling hunger, improving the effectiveness of our development assistance, a strong focus on human rights and ensuring that development assistance is focused on those most in need. I reaffirmed our continued support for the work of the Commission and the EEAS in implementing the Agenda for Change policy. I also noted our continued commitment to EU joint programming and the requirement to ensure that EU development assistance is focused on those regions, countries and communities most in need.

Tackling global hunger, and particularly the scourge of under-nutrition, has been a central focus of the Irish Presidency. The global community has made some good progress under the millennium development goals, but the reality is that one billion people still live in extreme poverty and 870 million people live with hunger. To highlight the interlinked challenges of hunger, under-nutrition and the impact of climate change, the Tánaiste and former President Mary Robinson last April co-hosted a conference focusing on how best to address these challenges. The conference was attended by President Higgins, the former US Vice-President Al Gore, the EU Development Commissioner Andris Piebalgs, other decision-makers from across the EU and UN and more than 100 grassroots representatives from across the developing world. A number of members of this committee were also in attendance.

At the development Council, Ministers adopted conclusions that will help ensure the EU and its member states implement our policy commitments on under-nutrition and food insecurity and that we are held accountable for them. The conclusions also endorsed the new EU food and nutrition security implementation plan developed in close co-operation with member states, including Ireland. It sets out how the EU and its member states will deliver on and implement the policy priority commitments of the 2010 EU food security policy, the new 2013 EU nutrition policy and other relevant EU external assistance policies, and how these policy commitments are to be translated into action over the period 2014 to 2020. Honouring our pledges will help us to ensure we can realise in our lifetime the vision of a world free from hunger and under-nutrition, a world where all children get the chance to survive, to grow, and to reach their full potential.

A priority during Ireland's Presidency was to promote better linkages between relief, recovery and development and to increase the focus on building the resilience of the most vulnerable individuals, families, communities and nations. The increasing frequency and intensity of disasters is a major threat to long-term development and to the economic progress of poor people in developing countries. These efforts at the Development Council culminated in the adoption of conclusions on a new EU approach to building the resilience of the most vulnerable communities in the poorest developing countries in order to ensure closer collaboration between the EU’s humanitarian and development arms.

As we see from the European Union's flagship resilience initiatives in the Horn of Africa and the Sahel, a common approach is more effective than separate, fragmented approaches.

There was a brief discussion on the EU's overseas development aid programme at the Council meeting, with the development Commissioner, Mr. Andris Piebalgs, noting the downward trend in the collective contribution. This is the second year running in which collective ODA has declined. It is important to note, however, that despite the economic difficulties member states are facing, the EU collectively continues to deliver more than 50% of global official development assistance to developing countries, with a total figure in excess of €55 billion in 2012. Development Ministers adopted conclusions at the development Council reaffirming the collective commitment of the European Union and its member states to all their individual and collective ODA commitments, taking into account the exceptional budgetary circumstances we face.

For Ireland, it is a very significant achievement that the Government has managed, in the most difficult of circumstances, broadly to stabilise our levels of ODA. We are strongly committed to Ireland's overseas aid programme and its centrality to our foreign policy. This is made clear in our new policy on international development, One World, One Future, which also restates the programme for Government commitment to achieving the United Nations target of providing 0.7% of GDP for official development assistance.

There were also short exchanges at the Council regarding the role of local authorities in development assistance, the 11th European Development Fund, and EU policy coherence for development, PCD, in advance of the publication of a biannual report on this issue later this year. We were joined at lunch by the United Nations Deputy Secretary General, Mr. Jan Eliasson, for an exchange of views on the situation post-2015, with particular reference to Afghanistan and Burma/Myanmar. In my capacity as representative of the Presidency, I presented the European Council position on the issues we had debated and agreed.

Having outlined the Government's new development policy and set out the main issues under consideration by the development segment of the Foreign Affairs Council in May, I will be happy to address any questions members might have. I thank them for their attention to my rather lengthy account.

Pat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister for his comprehensive overview of the situation as the Irish Presidency comes to an end. There has been a very strong focus during the course of the Presidency on development and world hunger. The conference organised by the Department in Dublin Castle, which was attended by Ms Mary Robinson, was very successful. The upcoming IAPA conference will continue the strong focus in this area. Our ongoing commitment in this area, both nationally and on the EU and international stage, is in line with our good reputation.

Jim Walsh (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister for a comprehensive presentation which has given much food for thought. In the context of his reference to maximising our potential, I acknowledge his commitment, despite the serious fiscal challenges we are facing, to maintaining our overseas aid expenditure. I understand it currently stands at 0.52% of GDP.

Joe Costello (Dublin Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is slightly below 0.5%. We will not know with certainty the exact position for 2013 until we receive the final GDP figure.

Jim Walsh (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As we have done in the past, this committee encourages the Minister of State to do his absolute best to ensure that provision is maintained. We have a larger role to play in this regard. As a small country, our contribution, while significant to us, is less substantial in the overall global scenario. It is important, however, that we leverage that contribution to encourage other countries to follow our example. There is an obligation on all contributing countries to continue moving towards the UN target of 0.7% of GDP as quickly as possible. We have found in the past that certain countries have allowed their provision to slip back. In fact, the largest portion of overseas aid provision is concentrated among countries in the European Union. We should be looking to Asia and the United States, for example, to do a little more. Likewise, certain countries in the Middle East might be in a position to make a greater contribution. That must be part of our efforts to maximise resources to tackle the problems faced by developing nations.

We have spoken about efforts to ensure a greater focus on mutual trade. That is a move in the right direction because it is about building sustainable economies rather than just addressing emergencies. As the Minister of State said, this is vital for the future sustainability of recipient countries. He also referred to measures to develop the private sector in those countries. What strategies have been devised to achieve that particular goal? On the other side of the coin, developing opportunities for trade provides benefits for Ireland, which is an important element in garnering public support for what we are trying to achieve. This emphasis on mutual benefit should be part of our focus. Have any periodic evaluations been undertaken in this regard and are there specific targets for achievement? Our embassies abroad play a very constructive role in that regard and have embraced the commercial culture which was inducted ten or 15 years ago. I am sure Mr. Cotter will have comments to make in that regard.

I congratulate the Minister of State on his recent signing of the Arms Trade Treaty, ATT, in New York. We should not underestimate the contribution this agreement can potentially make to reducing conflict in certain areas, conflict which can in itself be a huge contributor to deprivation, hunger and death. Ireland should do its utmost to ensure the treaty is implemented to its maximum potential.

Members of the committee have travelled to Lebanon and more recently to Palestine and the Middle East where we observed the conditions in which Palestinians have been living, for decades in some cases. The trip included a visit to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, UNRWA, camp at Za'atari, which was set up last July and is now home to 120,000 refugees living in portakabins and tents and with access to basic infrastructure. It is important that we leverage our influence on the political stage to seek a resolution of some of these long-standing conflicts. People living in these areas are enduring great suffering. We must do our best to ensure they can begin to look forward to a better future for themselves and their families.

In regard to the analysis of bilateral ODA by sector, I am reminded that we in this country would trace much of our more recent economic success back to the decision by Donogh O'Malley to introduce free secondary education in the 1960s. The concentration of resources since then on education, both secondary and tertiary, has been a significant driver of our economic growth. In that context, I notice that only some 9% of the EU's allocation for development aid goes towards education. A greater proportional focus on this area might be helpful in achieving the sustainability we seek. This seems particularly relevant in the context of our visit to Jordan. I understand too that only 2% of moneys go towards water and sanitation.

When one goes to such countries, one realises there are major challenges with regard to water supply. This affects the communities and will certainly affect development. The King of Jordan is on record as saying the next war in the Middle East will be about water, not oil. What can we do to boost our emphasis on the programme?

Seán Crowe (Dublin South West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As with others, I welcome the policy paper and the consultation process, in addition to the fact that the Minister of State said he would not only like to hear the views of this committee's members but also the views of others. He is still open to submissions.

Let me concentrate on my concerns about the paper in order to be supportive and helpful. With regard to hunger, the Government's policy focuses on what needs to change in developing countries but does little to acknowledge the many areas where change needs to happen in richer countries, as in respect of climate change, over-consumption and food wastage, for example. The policy paper does not focus enough on the major drivers of hunger around the world. Two pertinent issues are land grabbing and bio-fuels. An Oxfam survey implies that 58% of global land acquisitions in recent years are for bio-fuel production. Its research concludes that land used to produce bio-fuels for the European Union alone in 2008 could have been used to produce wheat and maize that could have fed 127 million people in that year. This, in itself, is telling. One fifth of the land in Senegal, Syria, Sierra Leone, one third of that in Liberia and over half of that in Cambodia has been acquired by companies. It is no coincidence that this is happening at the same time as impoverishment and hunger among millions around the world. The countries in question are producing the bio-fuels to fuel cars and maintain certain lifestyles while others starve. The document should focus much more on this. I am conscious that Irish people are aware of the Great Irish Famine and hunger. It will be positive if we move in this regard.

The policy document states Irish Aid spends 20% of its money on targeting hunger. What qualifies as hunger expenditure? Reference is made to building confidence but if people knew exactly where the money was spent, it would be useful. Just as people talk about investing in the local hospital, for example, they need to know exactly where the aid money is going. How does Irish Aid define and calculate hunger expenditure?

A previous submission referred to aid being motivated by economic and trading interests. This raises concerns, including among many NGOs. Untied aid has always been an issue in Ireland. There is now concern that there will be changes in this regard owing to the shift of focus to trade. Comhlámh and various NGOs have raised this, particularly in respect of the African strategy. While there should be emphasis on promoting companies and trade, it ought to be separated from aid; it cannot just be a driver on its own. Although reference is made to confidence, the Irish are concerned about poverty and inequality around the world and want to see aid going to the affected regions. Trade is helpful to Ireland but it should not be the main point of focus. This view was expressed by many but it does not seem to be reflected in the new policy document. Why has it not been included?

Sierra Leone has been included as the new key partner. I welcome the selection but note that East Timor has been dropped as a key partner. I do not know why. What criteria were used to select Sierra Leone as a new key partner and to drop East Timor?

The Minister of State talked about the post-2015 development framework. The European Union should be leading by suggesting what richer countries should be doing to change their economic, trade and financial practices. There was never much focus on this kind of development. Perhaps the Irish Government should do so. It is necessary to focus on income inequality. I asked earlier about what was happening in Brazil, one of the world's economic drivers. In regard to Brazil, the questions of inequality, poverty and slums arise. The Minister of State can understand why people are rising up in that country. Such uprisings, including the Arab spring, are the result of discrimination, inequality and people's aspirations not being met. We need to respond to that.

Eric Byrne (Dublin South Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

An interesting transition has taken place in that this committee used to focus on foreign affairs, and almost exclusively on aid, while it now focuses on trade and trade links. We are now speaking increasingly about development aid. I welcome the challenges and new direction, which direction has been taken in conjunction with the African ambassadors, headed by the Kenyan ambassador, who is spokesperson for approximately seven African countries. They argue very strongly that benefits can be gleaned for their countries and ours from an improvement in the areas of trade and development.

Am I correct in my summary of the current thinking of the Irish Government? We praise ourselves a lot, quite rightly, over aid we extend to the poorer regions. Increasingly, I am beginning to come to terms with the fact that our aid, by comparison with that of other countries and regions, is tiny, although that is not to say it is not important. We acknowledge the millennium development goals and we are engaged in the process of determining what happens next. We note the European Union's development contribution and we hear about the role of the United Nations in aid and development. A large number of charities are pumping billions of euro, presumably, into this area.

The Minister of State said we are now engaged with EU joint programming. That sounds very positive because, at the Irish Aid function with Mary Robinson, we met people for the very first time who are campaigning on matters that we did not really address, such as the concerns of pastoralists. The Masai tribespeople are pastoralists and are encountering many problems owing to game reserves and land that has been developed that is not in their ownership. Fishermen around Lake Victoria are facing a diminishing water supply. Major projects must and should be completed that will offer greater returns than those accruing from the investment of small sums of money.

If we are to enter into joint programmes with our EU partners, the totality of the resources thereby made available may allow us to target more important areas than would the small sums of money given to organisations like our missionaries. The latter do good work but their impact is limited in comparison to what could be achieved through major capital infrastructure projects.

In regard to the role of local authorities in development assistance, perhaps it is time to rethink our programmes. Aid is not always about feeding the hungry because often the hungry can be fed more effectively through major capital infrastructure programmes in agriculture, roads, hospitals and education. That may require us to move away from the idea of the black baby box and being good to the Africans by contributing our pennies. Perhaps we should think in a more global manner about how we assist countries in need.

Sierra Leone is mentioned in the report as a key partner country. We visited Sierra Leone in the company of the same sister from County Donegal who the Minister of Statem met when he visited. I understand Sierra Leone's Minister of Education could not spend his budget partly because of the weakness of the country's civil service infrastructure. Is it not better to equip government agencies to spend their budgets effectively? Sierra Leone is a war torn country with a literacy rate of 50%. This impacts on the country's civil service. What has Irish Aid in mind for Sierra Leone? Will we be assisting stand-alone programmes, such as the deaf support provided by the sister from Donegal, or will we be more ambitious in working cohesively with our partners on the big projects?

Olivia Mitchell (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister of State for ensuring that the traditional Irish commitment to aid was maintained in the budget in so far as this was possible in our current straitened circumstances. Although the overseas aid budget has been reduced in recent years it has not decreased as rapidly as many other programmes, in recognition of the fact that many people around the world are worse off than us.

Deputy Crowe raised the issue of trade. While I do not think the shift in emphasis should give rise to conflict, concerns have been expressed about EU policies such as the raw materials initiative and economic partnership agreements. It has been suggested that agreements like these, to which we are party as EU members, are designed to meet the needs of Europe rather the countries with which we sign partnerships. We should be conscious that we do not work to opposing purposes by offering aid on the one hand while signing agreements that are not to partner countries' advantage on the other.

At the risk of sounding like a broken record, I ask the Minister about the emphasis on maternal health and population issues in our aid programme. I have heard several people complain that our One World document has not received sufficient attention in our goals but it is mentioned in the important part of the document, namely, essential services. As that is a less aspirational aspect it might produce the goods at the end of the day. It is mentioned twice, in the context of the Cairo agreement on reproductive health care and access to contraceptive services, respectively. The next step is to ensure the implementation programme sets out concrete actions. I rely on the Minister of State to ensure that will be the case. I made representations to him in advance of the Council meeting to ensure that the positive Cairo agreement language on maternal health was included and I was pleased to see that it was.

The section on the rapid response initiative refers to fragile states and the continued deployment of highly skilled personnel and emergency supplies. I remind the Minister of State that, for women in conflict situations, emergency supplies often include contraceptives. This is particularly important now that rape appears to have become a common weapon of war. We must work with NGOs to ensure they appreciate the importance of contraceptives. I recognise that food, water and shelter are primary considerations but the availability of contraceptives is also important to many women because the normal supply chains disappear in conflict situations.

I ask for clarification on the implementation document. I thought the Minister of State referred to a 36 page document but he went on to say he was about to begin the consultation phase. I must have gotten mixed up.

Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister of State for his presentation. Having travelled to Sierra Leone, I am glad to see it listed as a new partner country. Our visit was a learning experience and I was struck by the magnitude of the task of rebuilding given the lack of essential urban services such as basic public lighting, sanitary services and footpaths. This was in stark contrast to the level of investment in the mining industry. The degree to which the lid can be kept on that level of social inequality is questionable. In the course of our new partnership with Sierra Leone, I hope Ireland and the international community address this issue. The Minister of State has also visited Sierra Leone and has seen the tremendous work being done by Sr. Mary in her schools. I also pay tribute to the work done by NGOs over many years. Our emphasis must now be on the extent to which the international community is prepared to focus on the problems of inequality in countries like Sierra Leone. We cannot allow that situation to continue unchecked for a prolonged period.

Land ownership is a serious problem on the continent of Africa. A particular problem is the way in which families are encouraged to sign over property which may contain valuable resources without adequate compensation.

To what extent is it possible to focus on the basic issues that primarily affect the most vulnerable countries, in terms of hunger, starvation, war, famine, strife, inequality and human rights abuses, in a meaningful and co-ordinated way in order to maximise the benefits for those in need of assistance?

Mark Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I raised the issue of the overseas aid budget with the Minister of State when he was in the Seanad previously. The annual report indicates that €206 million is provided in multilateral aid, including €128 million for EU development co-operation. Of the latter amount, €109 million in taxpayers' money, or money we borrowed from the EU itself, is being given back to EU institutions. The report gives a breakdown of every cent provided in bilateral funding, including €3,000 for a group in Sligo. Can we get the same level of detail on how the EU spends its money? We have given €18 million to the World Bank. I am not sure if that is money we have already borrowed from the World Bank. Will we get credit on the interest we are paying? Given the size of our contributions in multilateral aid, I am concerned that the money is getting tied up in institutions and bureaucracies rather than reaching the ground.

This committee is occasionally asked to approve five-year rolling funds for EU programmes, involving sums of money that can amount to millions of euro. Ireland has committed to making a proportionate contribution to the EU budget and, as our funding for overseas shrinks, our commitment to the EU stays at the same percentage. The amount of money provided to the headline bilateral programmes with partner countries must shrink because of our commitments to EU institutions.

I join Deputy Crowe in asking the Minister of State to explain how we select or deselect partner countries. Our involvement with Sierra Leone started through a great initiative by an Irish citizen and Dublin Bus employee who pushed the Government to do the right thing for a country with which we had no strategic or economic interest. Few countries in Europe would do the right thing for a country located so far away. We have since started a partnership with another country that clearly needs our assistance.

Brendan Smith (Cavan-Monaghan, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I apologise for missing the earlier part of the Minister of State's presentation. In the aftermath of the fraud discovered in Uganda, senior officials from the Department and the director of Irish Aid gave a full presentation to this committee on the progress that had been made in that country. At a time when every household in Ireland is facing challenges it is difficult for the Government to maintain the overseas aid budget at an acceptable level. It would be useful to communicate to the public the benefits that have accrued to the most deprived of people from programmes that Irish Aid funded in Uganda and elsewhere. In respect of Uganda, we learned about the great progress that has been made in educational attainment and retention at primary level and in the development of health facilities. Awareness of these successes would help to maintain public support for Irish Aid programmes and the NGOs which are currently finding it difficult to raise funds.

Much of the support provided by the United States and other major powers is in the form of tied aid. Have any proposals been made at European Union level on weaning countries off tied aid? Untied aid is clearly more beneficial to recipient countries.

Pat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I realise that the Minister of State has a considerable number of questions to answer but they overlap to a certain extent.

Joe Costello (Dublin Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank members for their extensive and probing questions. I will address as many of them as I can.

We have been doing our best to stabilise the overseas development aid budget, which decreased more than 30% from its high of 0.5% of GDP in 2008. In 2012 we were at 0.48% and the figures for 2013 will depend on the performance of the economy. We intend to maintain expenditure at close to the 0.5% level and the programme for Government commits us to reaching 0.7% if economic circumstances permit. We have done extraordinarily well considering our economic difficulties. We are encouraging other countries to maintain or increase their expenditure. Some have done so but others have slid backwards due to economic pressures. The United Kingdom, which is under considerable economic pressure, has increased its spending from 0.56% of GDP in 2012 to more than 0.7% this year. That is a most welcome development. The UK is considering a statutory requirement to increase overseas development assistance to 1%, which would be significantly higher than the United Nations target. That is an interesting development given that the UK's governing Conservative Party is under considerable pressure in regard to expenditure.

Our efforts to maintain our ODA levels are seen by many as a good example and have given us valuable credibility during our Presidency. The fact that we are regarded as being serious about our expenditure allows us to exert leadership as a small country even though we cannot draw on a massive amount of resources. Proportionately, we are seen as very generous both in terms of official ODA and individual donations to overseas development initiatives. We are still No. 1 in the world in our generosity to collections for developing countries and global disasters.

Opinions on trade differ. We have come to the firm conclusion that trade must be part of the equation.

Not only that; we are constantly being told by African countries that they want trade. They are extremely enthusiastic about engaging with the developed world on a level playing field. They see trade as that playing field. It is not a donor-to-recipient situation but a one-to-one engagement in investment, business and trade. This is coming through from all the countries we are engaged with very strongly. That is the relationship they want and we must build it up. At the same time, many of the countries to which we have traditionally been giving aid alone have made considerable progress in recent times. Very strong winds of economic change have been blowing across Africa, including sub-Saharan Africa, one of the poorest areas in which seven of our nine programme countries are concentrated. While the distribution is varied and disproportionate, economic growth has progressed enormously. It is only a few years since Zambia's overseas development assistance comprised 30% of its annual budget. The figure is now 4%, and this is reflected in many other countries as well. The proportion of aid in their budgets is only a fraction of what it was. In most countries we are dealing with, it is only approximately 10% of the annual budget. Overseas development aid is decreasing rapidly and trade and business is increasing rapidly. We must take cognisance of that and develop new strategies to ensure that happens. At the same time, however, we must not be seen to be exploitative. We do not want it to be a scramble for the resources of Africa. We do not want to provide overseas development aid only on condition that we get contracts. That is why our overseas development aid remains untied.

We will still present our overseas development aid to the areas of greatest need. That is why our overall policy in this document has two threads. One is that we are focusing on fragile states. We are moving to the states that are in most need. We have always been there but are moving up a notch to conflict or post-conflict areas because those countries have the greatest need and are seldom dealt with in a comprehensive fashion. There is an immediate response when the need is greatest but as soon as those countries stop appearing in the newspapers and on television, they are forgotten about and that means they often revert to a situation of conflict. The second thread is trade. We want to ensure those are the two major prongs of our approach.

We seek to engage our private sector. We have an African-Irish economic forum, the next meeting of which will take place in October. More than 200 Irish firms seeking to engage with Africa have already signed up to attend that forum. The African embassies will send African companies here to that forum and that business engagement is being established. We provide the countries, particularly our partner countries, with the expertise of our State agencies so they can avail, on request, of what Bord Bia, Enterprise Ireland or some of our research agencies might have to offer. Our embassies are a fulcrum of activity, with designated persons who are the first point of contact for anybody who wants to do business in Africa. Where there are Irish business networks established in the various areas, Irish businesses can access the African market and African companies can access the information we might be able to give in an advisory capacity. We want to develop that relationship as effectively as we can. The last thing we want is to have a situation where there is a conflict. We want to have it as a partnership. We want to build up a new approach to ethical engagement with countries to which we have previously only given development aid. Now we are getting to a new stage of also engaging in business and investment. It is a very interesting new development.

We had talks with the development Commissioner, Mr. Andris Piebalgs, a few weeks ago. I was hoping we would be able to manage a forum for the development ministers before the end of the Irish Presidency. Unfortunately, it did not happen, but I think it will happen soon. Countries that are beginning to change their approach need to discuss it and we need to get a common approach across the EU. We are the first country that has clearly put this out and are the only country, apart from the Netherlands, that has a Minister for trade and development. The Netherlands has that Minister because the new Government took on the role we have taken on and sees this as the way forward. It is a major issue and we have yet to tease out fully how we will go about it. Many members will have seen the Africa strategy document prepared in 2011, which spells out much of the relationship, but it has not been integrated in the same way that we have now integrated our One World, One Future policy.

The arms trade treaty to which Senator Walsh referred is extremely important. It was signed on the day in New York by 67 states. Approximately 20 EU states have signed it. The United States did not sign it on the day but was in favour of it and supported it, and it is expected to sign it. We have to get 50 states to ratify it before it becomes a legal convention and then it will apply across the board. It is a valuable treaty because it is the first to focus on small, light arms of the type we come across right across the Sahel, which are related to all the trouble coming into Mali. Such weapons are appearing in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and have appeared previously in Sierra Leone, and are widely available. Each country that signs up to this treaty will have to keep a register of all these weapons. This will be open to observation by a centralised body that will be established under the United Nations. Each country that is in the business of producing and selling weapons will have to produce an annual report of how all of its weapons are disposed of. Very strong surveillance and monitoring mechanisms are built into it so it could assist in dealing with some of the endemic conflicts we experience across Africa so often, in countries that return, post-conflict, to another series of conflicts, and in many civil wars.

Land grabbing and bio-fuels are major issues that have come to the fore recently. Part of this is due to the EU itself, which produced an energy directive a few years ago that required that 10% of all fuel for transport uses would have to be bio-fuel.

Since the publication of the directive and under our Presidency, we have been advocating a reduction to 5%. The proportion should be reduced by as much as possible. Land that can be used for the production of food should not be used for the production of fuel. We are nowhere near an agreement on this issue because many countries, particularly in Eastern Europe, are very much in the business of producing bio-fuel and believe a reduction would lead to considerable unemployment.

Bio-fuel production has resulted in the purchasing or leasing of lands in Africa. However, it is very difficult to purchase lands in Africa. We are very anxious to see a considerable reduction in bio-fuel production on these lands. In most cases, the relationship is never clear because land is owned or held communally in Africa. Therefore, leasing and purchasing will always be grey areas.

Recently I was in Mozambique, where there are 35 million ha of arable land, only 4% of which is in use. There is considerable capacity for agricultural production in Africa and we must direct more of our resources in that direction. We have been doing a considerable amount in this regard. Two years ago we put together a joint programme with the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine to put a pilot scheme in place in Kenya and Tanzania. This will come to fruition shortly and we will be examining how our expertise in agriculture can be transferred, as effectively as possible, to African countries that are not using land or marketing their products effectively and that do not have the necessary skills to do either. We must determine what resources and information we can bring to bear on the matter. We are very anxious to assist in this area.

In 2008, when we examined the issues of nutrition and hunger, we decided that, by 2012, 20% of Irish Aid's resources would be used to deal with hunger and malnutrition. This is achieved in many ways. In Europe I am told constantly that this is the Irish issue because we have been championing it for so long. We have taken some very interesting initiatives. For example, we have combined with USAID and Concern International on what is called Scaling up Nutrition, a programme focusing on the 1,000 days between pregnancy and the age of two years. We marked this programme at the beginning of June in Washington when I was present with the CEO of Irish Aid. The programme has been a major success and over 40 countries are now participating in Scaling up Nutrition. We are devoting some funding to it, while the United States is devoting a lot. During the prelude to the G8 summit in County Fermanagh, the Taoiseach was invited to London to co-host with the UK Prime Minister a new programme on hunger and nutrition. He was not invited by chance but because Ireland was seen as the leading light in championing the targeting of hunger and malnutrition. We spread aid across the entire area of development, including agriculture, health, water and sanitation and rural development. Scaling up Nutrition is now regarded as a major success and has been taken very much into the Council's conclusion. It is in one of our recent Council conclusion documents and will almost certainly be part of the post-2015 agenda. This is a success story, but not only for the Irish Presidency. In recent years we have been leading in this area and it is now regarded as very much the Irish issue.

I was asked why we selected fragile states such as Sierra Leone and not others. Only ten years ago Sierra Leone came out of a civil war in which there was widespread rape, child abuse and use of child soldiers. That is one reason we are focusing on it. Although we are not focusing on East Timor to the same degree, it will be a partner country, but not in the same way as one of the key ones because it has adequate resources. It is now nearly a middle income country and has moved up the chain. If we are to focus on the fragile countries, we must direct resources to where need is greatest. Page 31 of our document lists all of the reasons a country is chosen as a key partner. Criteria include the level of poverty, fertility and equality, the commitment to human rights, the prevention of corruption, partnership, sustainable results and the commitment to exiting from dependency on aid. We want to concentrate on the fragile countries and increase their status to leastdeveloped countries and then to middle income countries. This can be done as part of a continuum involving the focusing of untied resources on fragile countries and the focusing of resources for trade, business and investment on those moving up the chain.

On joint programming, it is a question of how we achieve the best results. This has arisen at so many conferences, including the Busan conference, and in the Commission's work. There is not enough coherence in the activities taking place. Countries are operating in an isolated, discrete fashion and there is not enough collaboration and cohesion. The European Union, a multilateral donor, has a lot of funding going into it. That we have an overseas development aid programme at all is because we needed to have it; it was one of the conditions for joining the European Union. Every country in the Union must have an overseas development programme, including the countries that have just joined, which come in at a different level. In return for meeting our membership obligations we receive so much by way of Cohesion and Structural Funds. The Common Agricultural Policy is part of this. There is a link with the overall budget, the multi-annual financial framework which the Tánaiste and the Taoiseach will be trying to bring to fruition in the coming days in order that we will have a budget to meet the various objectives. We are still very much beneficiaries of the budget. If it were not for the money that other countries have put into a fund from which we have been able to draw, it would have been very difficult for us to have reached our current level of development. In many ways, we have received development aid from the European Union; therefore, I would not want in any way to diminish the multilateral aid the European Union makes available to developing countries. Through this committee and development ministries and by virtue of our position in various working groups in the European Union, we have a supervisory role.

The same is the case in regard to the United Nations. We are on all the relevant committees. Likewise, we have representatives on the World Bank. The €18 million that goes to the World Bank comes from the Department of Finance, not our Department. In any case, the joint programming to which I referred is something which is very desirable because it means we get the best bang for our buck.

I launched an excellent programme today with the Royal College of Surgeons. We are now the 12th member of Esther, a networking programme dealing with health. Countries and institutions will come together. In Ireland the HSE is involved. It is doing a fantastic job in many countries in Africa in the partnerships it has established with hospitals and clinics. We helped to fund it and it is providing skilled people to ensure the programmes are run well. It is all part of a training programme and is bringing expertise at a training and learner level to local areas. It is an example of joint programming which is delivering the goods extremely efficiently.

The issue of maternal and infant mortality was raised by Deputy Mitchell. It is tied into hunger and nutrition. We are very much to the fore in that area. It is the essential part of what we call the scaling of nutrition. There was an article in The Lancet in 2008 which determined that many children and mothers were not getting the right food and there was a relationship between hunger and nutrition. One could have enough food but not necessarily enough nutritious food. It recognised the importance of ensuring there are micro nutrients in food. Ireland is an agricultural country and could determine how best to do that. We led the way on that.

Maternal and infant mortality has been very much to the fore in the work we are doing and is one of the millennium development goals. It has been quite successful in reducing the incidence of death in the under fives and maternal mortality in childbirth. It is an area we brought to the table during our Presidency as one of our priorities. It has been taken on by the Commission. Hunger, nutrition and food security is one of the Council conclusions. Through our conference we have also included climate change which must become a major part of that initiative.

We could talk about economic partnership agreements forever. Economic partnerships were proposed by the EU to the African, Caribbean and Pacific countries in 2000. The idea was that the relationship between developing countries and the EU should not be a preferential relationship in terms of trade. We did not want to go down the road of the WTO, which was a liberalised regime. There has been a lot of debate about it and a number of organisations and NGOs felt developing countries would get a raw deal.

The situation now is quite different from that which pertained in 2000. The EU and European Parliament have decided that by October 2014 an agreement will be negotiated on the economic partnership agreements or we will forget about it because the process has been in place for almost 14 years. If there is no agreement there is not much sense in talking about something which will not achieve anything.

We have taken the view that the circumstances in many countries have changed dramatically. We are a long way away from the situation in 2000. At same time, there is a considerable degree of flexibility. There can be exemptions for individual countries and industries which feel they would be threatened. We remember very well that when we entered the EU in 1973 we were afraid our small and weak industries would be overwhelmed. Instead markets gave us much greater opportunity.

Structures are still in place to provide protections. If it is going to be done now is the time to do it. There is an extra focus at the current time. Our Presidency put an extra focus on coming up with some agreement between different countries. Many countries are now negotiating with the EU on a regional basis, such as ECOWAS for the west African economic community grouping. SADC, the South African community grouping, is also participating. I hope there is a solution because if there is not the preferential treatment provided and the market access regulations which have been put in place are in danger of slipping away. I hope we will not revert to a WTO situation.

We support family planning and have always done so. We feel it is part and parcel of our programme. Normally we are involved through the UNDPA which is where most of our funding goes. It is part and parcel of the good health view we have of dealing with health problems and issues. It is something we feel is an integral part of good health.

What more is there to say about Uganda? Ireland, Denmark and, I understand, Sweden had a special fund for development in Uganda which was misappropriated. All of the funding was returned to us by December 2012. Since that time we have refrained from engaging with the Ugandan Government in regard to any funding. Any funding which has been provided has come through NGOs or projects, but not through the Ugandan budget or any joint approach with the Ugandan Government.

The investigations are ongoing and we are keeping tabs on all of that. One of the key people involved has been convicted in regard to the scam which took place. A number of investigations, court hearings and prosecutions will take place. We will wait until we see what happens before there is any further engagement on the same basis as in the past. It taught a lot of people a lesson.

The international community has, in many cases, refrained from providing funding to Uganda. The UK has withheld its funds because it saw what happened and the action we took. The comptroller and auditor general who was responsible for discovering the misappropriation is someone we trained and is continuing with the work.

We are strengthening and funding that sector. In the not too distant future I intend to invite that gentleman to Ireland so he can explain the process that took place and let people know, including this committee, just how they were able to determine what happened, and the input Ireland put into his training and into the institutions and mechanisms that now allow for a scam of that nature to be detected. It has been a very good and worthwhile learning experience. The fact that all the money that was misappropriated has been returned means that the message has gone out loud and clear to other countries, in case anybody else is engaged in similar activity.

We believe that education is very much a part of what we do. We have two sets of programmes. We have development education here in Ireland, which is quite robust and is done at primary, second, third and adult levels. That involves awareness and information education on what is happening. We are also involved with education in our programmes across the board. We believe our input on an educational basis is quite strong. It is estimated that it is 9% to 10% of the direct amount of ODA, which is more or less the average in the OECD countries. It is always part and parcel of what we do because there is always an educational element in it. As I said with our health and nutrition programme, it goes across the different sectors as well.

One of the millennium development goals, No. 2, is education and Ireland and the global community were very successful in ensuring that this goal, which is to get children attending primary schools, has been extraordinarily successful across the board. The developing countries have responded to that. However, at the same time we have failed to ensure there were enough qualified teachers. Classes were too large, with 100 to 150, and youngsters were learning very little. That part of the equation has not been successful. There will be a great deal of focus on that area in the review period over the next two and a half years before the post-2015 agenda.

In conclusion, we have sought to do a couple of things. We have put together our new policy and established a refocus to get the best results from our funding. There are strong accountability measures put in place. It is a whole-of-government approach and we are seeking to get all the Departments involved, for example, the Department of Health in health areas, the Department of Finance which can provide help on revenue and so forth. We have been endeavouring to do that. We have largely combined that with our EU Presidency. We ensured that our policy for the future as well as much of the input into the vision we have for the 15 years post-2015, the successor to the present millennium development goals, will have a framework that we have put in place and will also have a great deal of the substance of what we are discussing. The vision will be the eradication of poverty through sustainable development and the framework will be a single common set of objectives involving both the development issues and the environment issues. We will bring that to the table in New York in September and share it as the way forward.

In addition to that, we have spoken to the African, Caribbean and Pacific, ACP, countries in the last two weeks. We met the African Ministers and I co-chaired most of the discussions. There are almost 80 countries involved there. They have agreed that they wish to be involved with the European Union in putting forward the final agenda on which we can agree. Between now and June 2014, the ACP countries will engage with the European Union countries so we can agree a common set of priorities, targets and goals that we will then put forward for the United Nations to take on board for the new 2015 agenda. Certainly, it would give great credibility to all the work we have been doing if we have all the developing countries coming together with the 28 developed countries in a single framework and approach to the post-2015 agenda.

I thank the committee for listening to me and for its questions. I hope we have answered them reasonably thoroughly.

Pat Breen (Clare, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister for his comprehensive presentation and replies to the members' questions. The questions were very varied and the Minister will see that members have a huge interest in this area. It is very much part of our work programme. Obviously, there is huge potential in forging closer relationships with the countries the Minister mentioned. He outlined the framework for how Ireland will move forward in the future. The committee members have seen some of that work during some of the visits that have taken place. An example is Ethiopia, which we visited two years ago. It has transformed itself into a very successful economy now, after the poverty and hunger it went through a number of years ago. Last year, the committee visited Sierra Leone, a country that has been through civil war. We saw some of the work Irish Aid and the NGOs are doing there. As it is a partner country now, there will be more focus on the priority areas the Minister mentioned. Obviously, the business and trade element is important. When I first visited Africa I saw for myself how green it is. The Minister mentioned the millions of acres of land in Mozambique and we saw some of the projects Irish Aid is doing there in helping farmers to help themselves and to grow more food. All of these projects are small but they can be made bigger. It is like a seed growing.

I sincerely thank the Minister. The committee will have a different focus now from the previous visits. We will be visiting Ghana, which the Minister visited last year, to look at the potential for trade for Ireland. That will be an interesting visit for the committee in September. There is a different focus but it is part of the way things are going forward. One World, One Future is a very important document and I am delighted that the Minister intends to retrace his footsteps back to the roots of where this document originated in terms of the views of the many people who attended those meetings. It will be valuable for the Minister to get the views of these people on the document. Many of the NGOs are delighted with what is included in the document.

I also thank the Minister of State's team including Mr. Vincent O'Neill, with whom we have been working closely over the last number of years, and Mr. Tony Cotter, a fellow Clare man. Tony has spent much time in Africa as well. The questions were wide ranging and the discussion was interesting. We look forward to more discussions with the Minister and his team in the future. Well done to him and the Tánaiste on the work they did during the EU Presidency and we hope it reaps rewards.