Conor Lenihan (Dublin South West, Fianna Fail)

I thank all Members on a cross-party basis for the intelligent, sympathetic and insightful contributions made in the debate.

I was struck particularly by the contribution of the last speaker, Deputy Carey, who urged that Ireland should lead the process of discussion, negotiation and hard change at a UN and international level in terms of how Ireland will respond in future to disasters of this kind. I am uniquely aware of this given that I am just one year in my job. In that year there has been a crisis in Niger, we have had the tsunami, the whole issue of food security in the sub-Saharan Sahel region and the flooding in Central America. They beg not only for a domestic response but an international response that is coherent and focused on the job to be done.

Ireland has led the way in regard to the crisis response mechanism that exists at a domestic and international level. I do not say that to take credit for this Government or any other Government. This response has been built up carefully in our aid programme over a number of years ranging from former Ministers of State who contributed to the debate, Deputies Burton, O'Donnell, and many others, including, Deputy Jim O'Keeffe, who have made an enormous contribution to our aid programme.

Ireland is regarded seriously in terms of our response to these crises. In 1999 when the OECD conducted its peer group review, Ireland ranked "among the cutting edge of development policy" and was singled out for praise in regard to the manner in which it approached the emergency response and recovery. It is not the case that we are faltering or lagging behind in this area. We are up there with the best in the world in terms of utilising best practice. Deputies have asked how we can leverage the level of expertise we have brought to bear as a small player with a strong moral voice in these matters and transmute it into the international response, which is acknowledged to be clearly wanting.

Mr. Jan Egeland, head of the UN Office for the Co-ordination of Humanitarian Affairs, OCHA, which is the lead UN agency for such crises, has acknowledged that the crisis response mechanism is deeply stretched at this time. This is not least because of the many and varied crises it has had to address this year.

In conjunction with the UK, we led a study into crisis emergency response mechanisms which confirmed that the Irish response has been very good. A few weeks ago, I attended the UN summit with the Taoiseach and the Minister for Foreign Affairs. While there, I attended a round-table meeting with Jan Egeland and other UN officials. Mr. Egeland has made a proposal for reforming the central emergency revolving fund or CERF facility. The fund, which is loan-based, not grant-based, stands at €40 million. Mr. Egeland's proposal was that this would become a grant-based standing fund of €500 million. It would provide the financial mechanism to cope with the enormous financial and logistical demands on the UN and individual countries — in this case Pakistan — when natural disasters, including earthquakes, occur. We fully support the proposed reform of the CERF mechanism within a tight timeframe.

However CERF is reformed, it should not supplant or take away from existing funds available for emergencies. At the UN summit in New York, the United Kingdom signalled its support by stating it would make a minimum contribution of €40 million to such a fund, presumably over a number of years. The Swedish Government also indicated that it would pledge a minimum amount of €14 million to the same fund.

In the coming days, I hope to be in a position to signal the minimum pledge Ireland will be able to make to that fund. I am anxious to make this pledge to indicate our general spirit of goodwill towards the creation and management of such a fund. In common with other donor countries, we have issues about how such a fund should be managed and, critically, that it should not take away from existing funds available from UN and other agencies.

I will soon be able to signal that we will participate in the emergency fund, which will have the flexibility to respond to these crises where the immediate requirement is cash. We often hear people of goodwill providing material contributions which are not really effective. Earlier this year, we saw the scenes in Banda Aceh where large amounts of unwanted clothes were stored in sheds. It is important to apply clear principles when it comes to providing humanitarian assistance. In many respects, cash is the best contribution an individual or a country can make in such circumstances. By its nature, cash can be used to deploy quickly the necessary food and other supplies required following crises of this kind.

I was struck by the contribution of my constituency colleague, Deputy O'Connor, who said there is a real danger of donor fatigue following the appeals for aid in Pakistan and Central America. People may not respond as warmly and generously to these appeals as they did to earlier ones. Clearly, there have been many such appeals this year. When the enormous commercial push of the Christmas season approaches in this wealthy country, I ask individuals and businesses to set aside some money for humanitarian appeals that are being launched by the non-governmental organisations for Central America and, more importantly, Pakistan given the death toll there. I appeal to people to respond generously, perhaps by curtailing the normal spending spree over the Christmas period. They should take into consideration the awful situation faced by survivors of the earthquake in Pakistan and the mudslides in Central America.

I know that the Irish people will respond as best they can. The Government wishes to prompt such generosity from them, given the strong contribution made here by the Pakistani community as well as the wider Muslim community in Ireland. This is a unique opportunity for us to show our solidarity with the Muslim population of Ireland who, following various global events in recent years, may feel that they are placed apart. Let me assure them that they are not.

Deputy Murphy referred to Japan, which illustrates the issue of preparedness. There are large coastal protection barriers on the west coast of Japan designed to protect that country from a maritime disaster such as a tsunami. Large concrete structures have been placed in the sea to prevent such a disaster. In addition, Japanese offices and homes contain early-warning systems to detect earth tremors. Systems are also in place there to prevent buildings collapsing during an earthquake. It is not rocket science but Japan has mastered the art of disaster preparedness, given the country's vulnerability to earthquakes.

That preparedness demonstrates the importance of the development agenda. While poor countries do not have such systems, rich countries like Japan do. I am not saying that Japan is beyond the reach of an earthquake, but the risks have been minimised thanks to the early-warning systems that have been put in place. That preparedness is due to Japanese planning methods and the country's wealth. We need to bring such planning methods to less developed countries which we assist through our aid programmes. They need to be helped in coping with the threat of natural disasters.

In January, I visited Mauritius for the conference of small island development states in the wake of the tsunami disaster. Through our aid programme we funded significant research on a new environmental vulnerability index which will help policymakers to decide what factors make countries vulnerable to such phenomena and how they can be addressed.

I commend Deputy Gormley on his point on the environment. There are issues we can master concerning the physical environment to minimise the risks involved.

I assure Deputy Burton and Deputy Michael D. Higgins that, as regards broader Government policy in the development sphere, we are closely examining the possibility of expanding our overseas aid programme. We are looking at the issue of geographical spread in connection with our ability to learn and help other people around the world. Specifically, we are examining the possibility of establishing an aid programme in a Latin American country. We will be evaluating that matter carefully. We are not neglecting that region but our primary focus is on Africa. Deputy Neville is correct in that nothing we disperse on the disaster in Pakistan, or any future disasters, will divert funds from our ongoing, long-term development programme. The latter is primarily focused on the least-developed countries of Africa where the world's greatest poverty exists and, thus, people's needs are more acute.

Deputy Coveney spoke passionately and said that Ireland has real credibility in the areas of human rights and development. As Minister of State, I assure the House that the issues of human rights, environmental vulnerability and crisis response will be to the forefront of our actions as we expand our aid programme. We have set a date of 2012 to achieve the UN target figure of 0.7% of gross national product. We will achieve that target date but we must plan our expenditure carefully to do so. Ireland must be a leading voice internationally. Ireland is a small country that is punching way above its weight globally in the development and diplomatic spheres. To do that we must be a leading advocate for best practice and timely response led by the UN asserting the primacy of the UN in all situations of international conflict or crises such as we have seen in Pakistan.

I again thank all the Members for their very generous contributions. I am greatly encouraged by the discussion and by the points made my many of them. It is ironic that some powerful countries spend huge amounts of money on defence commitments and yet none of these amounts are available to help when a disaster occurs. It poses a very serious question to those countries and not to Ireland, which has had a leading role in the area of disarmament and development. This is a tribute not just to this Government but also to all previous Governments that have contributed to our development co-operation programme. I thank all the former Ministers who contributed.

See this speech in context