Ms Anne O'Mahony:

I wish to apologise for the absence of our CEO, Mr. Dominic McSorley, but he had a prior commitment that he could not change.

South Sudan is very close to my heart. I have worked on and off for many years in South Sudan but I have also worked in North Sudan, so that has given me a different perspective of how the country was shaping up.

Like Mr. Clarken I remember when the peace deal was signed and the level of optimism when the new Sudan, emerging out of years of conflict, was formed and would take its place among the nations of the world. It had the benefit of significant oil revenues and there was a hope it could fund its own development.

As a result of the suffering during the war years, there were significant gaps in the provision of education. The emerging leaders had no great educational attainment and no experience of governance. There was the expectation that with limited support South Sudan would become a nation and take its place in the world. In the subsequent years the SPLA and the various other rebel forces became part of the army and were paid. There was no merging of the forces within the army so they continued to operate separately as opposed to a single unit that was there to serve and defend the new nation. That approach has been reflected throughout the way the country developed in the past three years. It was almost inevitable that it would break down in conflict. It was more a matter of when rather than if it would happen. The sad part is that there was a great opportunity for support for nation building through the three years of that evolution. That opportunity for nation building was clearly missed and not taken on board.

Oil has been both a blessing and a curse in so many different parts of Africa. In South Sudan, it has caused more pain and suffering than it has benefited the people. The oil reserves have been a source of controversy between the north and south. The taps were turned off a couple of years ago and the issue of paying soldiers and ensuring that the government had revenue to operate. All of the factors fed into what happened in mid December 2013. Conflict broke out.

We have been working in South Sudan for years. Concern staff remained in Juba over Christmas when many other humanitarian agencies evacuated their staff. Concern put in extra staff to deal with the influx of refugees and displaced people into Juba.

They needed care and maintenance and we stayed to provide them. We also continued our operations in Bentiu, which has proved extremely difficult as a location for Concern. We have a team on the ground, which stays in the UNMISS compound with staff from several other non-governmental organisations. When the area comes under attack staff move into a bunker where they remain until the attacks ease off. They then come out to try to lend assistance before returning to the bunker for another period. Ceasefire agreements come and go. It is great, therefore, that a new agreement was signed yesterday. We are all waiting with bated breath on what will emerge and whether the agreement will mark the beginning of the end of the conflict.

Many of the underlying causes of the conflict persist. We see a level of aggression among some of the South Sudanese on both sides that we have not encountered previously. Our staff have come under attack. The other day, for instance, we had to send a member of staff working in a distribution centre to receive stitches caused by aggression. Much of this can be attributed to years of conflict and the struggle that people have in relating to other human beings on a one-to-one basis.

As Mr. Edgar and Mr. Clarken stated, this is a long and protracted emergency. We are very worried about food security in the region. I worked in Khartoum in 1989 and 1990 when hundreds of thousands of famine-ravished people moved from south Sudan into the north. Is such a scenario coming down the line again? The conflict is preventing access to many of the planting areas. If the seed is not planted now and a ceasefire is not in place to enable planting to take place, there will definitely be a famine. South Sudan was starting at a low base and experienced very high malnutrition rates last year and the year before when normal circumstances prevailed. The war has completely interrupted the transfer and distribution of goods and disrupted market access.

I do not want to appear before this committee or speak at another forum in six or 12 months in the midst of one of the most dreadful famines that one could imagine. Such a scenario is not beyond the bounds of possibility, however. While we are doing a great deal of work to try to pre-position goods, security does not allow us to do so to the extent we would like. Access is also a significant issue. In addition, the rains are coming and have already arrived in many places. Concern is intensely worried that the circumstances will worsen and the funding position will not enable us to mount the level of response we would like. We are also intensely worried that access to the vulnerable populations we would like to visit on a much more regular and supportive basis will not be open to us.

To return to the contributions of Mr. Edgar and Mr. Clarken, Ireland is in a strong position to raise the voice of Sudan in the various forums in which we enjoy such a high reputation. As representatives of non-governmental organisations, we must examine how we can raise Ireland's voice.

Effective and lasting peace is a prerequisite for progress and will only be achieved if there is a demand and pressure from all sides to try to have a peace accord signed and subsequently operated, monitored and rolled out, with people held to account when it is not realised to the extent promised. We also want to achieve humanitarian access. We need to access the most vulnerable populations. The reconciliation talks need to address the gross human rights abuses that have taken place by all sides in the conflict. There must also be a commitment to nation building. Even if a peace deal were signed in the morning, we would still be faced with the same problems and underlying causes of the conflict. Concerted efforts at nation building are needed.

All of us have referred to food security and the potential for famine. Debate on this issue must be raised to a new level in areas in which members are active and can use their voices for South Sudan. The idea of a famine is horrific. Having worked through many famines, I certainly do not want a similar scenario to emerge. We must work together to prevent such an eventuality.

Timely and effective disbursement of humanitarian funds is important. One of the big issues we face at the moment is that while much of the humanitarian funding for South Sudan was intended for a wide area, as Mr. Edgar indicated, not all areas are affected by conflict and some are still at peace. Concern works in Aweil West, which has been unaffected by the conflict thus far. The funding that was committed to Aweil West has been transferred to fund a humanitarian response in some of the areas where conflict is taking place. We are dealing with high levels of malnutrition in Aweil West as part of normal practice. As a result, if the funding destined for this area is reallocated, we will not be able to deal with the malnutrition we are seeing daily. In addition, the transfer of this funding will fuel the conflict because the people affected will feel excluded, disenfranchised and angry. The conflict could spread if funding is not returned to the areas from which it is being transferred.

Ireland has a strong voice, which is well respected in many of the forums in which members are active. As such, members could speak a great deal, change the direction and bring Sudan up a notch in terms of perception and visibility.