Dan Boyle (Cork South Central, Green Party)

I move:

That Dáil Éireann, given the meeting of the leaders of the G8 countries being held in Edinburgh, Scotland and given subsequent meetings being held for the UN Millennium Summit in New York and meetings of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank in September 2005 and the World Trade Organisation Ministerial conference in December 2005, calls on the Government through its own policies to assist in making poverty history and to this end:

—reaffirms Ireland's policy of supporting 100% debt cancellation for heavily indebted poor countries, going beyond the inadequate, though welcome, proposal of the G8 group of nations to restrict such cancellation to a list of 18 countries; and

—that such debt cancellation should not be accompanied by damaging conditions which would erode the benefits of cancellation;

—that such cancellation should be funded out of additional moneys, supporting the views of non-governmental organisations that International Monetary Fund gold reserves be sold to help finance debt cancellation; and

—that developed nations move away from operating as both judge and plaintiff in relation to heavily indebted poor countries;

—recognises that debt cancellation is only part of what is needed to assist heavily indebted poor countries and that targeted and untied aid must continue to be given and significantly increased;

—resolves to agree a new target date in view of the Government's acknowledgement that it will not meet its commitment to reach 0.7% of GNP to be devoted to overseas development aid by 2007;

—calls on the Taoiseach to reaffirm Ireland's commitment to this target at the forthcoming UN Millennium Summit;

—further recognises the importance of fair trade in bringing about international social justice;

—demands re-examination of subsidies given to producers in the developed world and the effect of such subsidies on their counterparts in less developed nations;

—calls on the Government to support a reappraisal of the European Union's economic partnership agreements with African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries in light of serious concerns that they would inhibit rather than promote the economic development of those countries;

—acknowledges the need to restrict the international trade in arms in order to assist conflict resolution and prevent the terrible cost in human lives and attendant economic costs of such trade;

—calls on the Government to strongly support the initiative being taken by the Government of Finland to bring about an arms trade treaty through the framework of the United Nations; and

—resolves that the Government, in the upcoming renegotiation of the Kyoto agreement, support a fair distribution of carbon allocation on a per capita basis in view of the increasing convergence between the issues of environmental degradation and world poverty, as evidenced by the fact that the costs of climate change are being disproportionately borne by the world's poorest people.

In introducing this motion we had hoped a collective opinion might go from this House to meet what we hope is a global gathering of minds on issues of world poverty. As matters stand, an important meeting of the G8 group of countries will take place this weekend in Scotland. However, as this House will not reconvene until the end of September, this debate presents an opportunity to the Government to outline policy positions as regards other international gatherings that will address these important policy issues, namely, the meetings of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank in September. Probably the most important of all is the UN Millennium Summit also to be held in September in New York.

It was at a previous UN meeting that the Taoiseach made the promise that Ireland would meet the commitment of 0.7% of gross national product, GNP, in overseas development aid by 2007. It is greatly disappointing that the Government has since stated it cannot meet this commitment. It is particularly frustrating that it has not indicated by what date it intends to meet this target. It is with a great deal of disillusionment that many of us behold the failure to put in place any mechanisms to reach this target as we address the motion.

In the course of this debate we intend to cover the five most pertinent issues at the meetings mentioned. They include the important concepts of aid, trade and debt cancellation; the crucial need to put the brakes on the pernicious global trade in arms; the linking of issues of social justice with environmental degradation, and the need to adopt a truly global position on issues of climate change. Each of my party colleagues and I hope other Members will address these issues on an individual level.

I will begin by talking about what seems to be the main issue that will come from the G8 summit next weekend. A preliminary meeting has indicated that a deal has been reached on debt cancellation. Many of those involved in development work have indicated that it is an important first step. It must be acknowledged, however, that the deal is limited to 18 countries and that there is a degree of conditionality as regards how the debt will be met. There is a great deal of uncertainty about whether the debt being cancelled will be dealt with through existing aid budgets or through new funding mechanisms as proposed by many NGOs, namely, the sale of the International Monetary Fund gold reserves. If we get this wrong at the outset, we could be in danger of putting the cause of alleviating global poverty back even further.

Undoubtedly, the issue has been talked about for several decades on many levels since the end of the Second World War. During that period, however, we have seen a doubling of the distance in terms of overall wealth between the wealthiest countries in the world and the 20% of countries at the other end of the scale. There has been enough talk, meetings and summits. Those who care about these issues and, more importantly, those affected by them daily hope the series of meetings which will take place next week and beyond will, at last, provide the opportunity for which people in the developing world have been waiting.

In addressing these issues in their totality we are, for once, reviewing more pertinent matters than we ordinarily deal with in this House on a regular basis. These are issues of grave international importance. While at times we get caught up in the pantomime of name calling and point scoring about individual political positions in this Chamber to do with our system of politics, we had hoped in tabling the motion that there would be a consensus of views, with the House speaking collectively. Unfortunately, the Government's amendment, in effect, amounts to a new motion. It carries too much self-aggrandisement to be regarded as a serious attempt to deal with the issues involved. Possibly, during the course of the debate other contributions and the potential for further amendments might see by the end of tomorrow's business a coming together of views in order that this House may at least send a message that those outside this Chamber want to hear.

See this speech in context