Michael D Higgins (Galway West, Labour)

I welcome the opportunity to contribute to the debate on this matter. I wish to put some questions to the Minister of State. While I have wished him well in all of his endeavours to date, some conclusions might be drawn from an earlier presentation that affect what has been said on one of the topics with which he is dealing, namely, the resumed WTO talks. The latter have been described by some of the NGOs that will be represented at the talks as taking place on the eve of a disaster. Although the meeting in Hong Kong produced a better offer for most of the developing countries than the one made at Cancún, it is regarded by every NGO dealing with trade as far short of what is needed. For example, while we have heard in this debate about the elimination of export subsidies for agricultural products, they comprise approximately 3.7% of the EU basic activity and, therefore, we must be vigilant in all the other areas. I do not have time to go into detail but we can deal with particular questions later. On the demands for flexibility and access to markets and services, what has been offered on agriculture in the developing world is perceived as minimal. That creates an issue.

It is time that some hard evidence was provided in respect of the millennium development goals. Time is running out. It should be stated publicly in parliaments that the budget for the response to the AIDS crisis in Africa has not been met by the countries that committed to it. Neither the amount pledged nor that delivered approach what is required to make significant progress. I do not have the detailed figures but I think the highest point funding reached was 40% of what was required to achieve the goal. We need reports on the progress of the millennium goals. There is evidence that few of the goals will be met on the continent of Africa. That creates a crisis and there is no point stating otherwise. The 110 that came together to extract a slightly better package in Hong Kong than they had in Cancún are likely to conclude that they will do better on trade by delaying an agreement rather than by accepting what is on offer.

I cannot understand why the name of Irish Aid has changed again. What was wrong with the original name? I am weary of being unable to answer queries on how individuals might take part, as competent persons, in volunteering or working in different parts of the developing world. These questions have been submitted to me by fine people who, or whose friends, have given fine service abroad for APSO. It is difficult to get a straight answer in respect of this matter, which is not to be disposed of by saying that we like to pass on responsibility for the various projects to local people. The latter is an approach that I support.

I was interested in the Minister of State's combination of human rights and their integration into the development project. Following the election of Hamas in Palestine, Ramallah is besieged with development workers. When I was there last year, one could hardly move without bumping into such individuals. They ask why the EU, which like the Minister of State, talks about human rights, refuses to address the illegality of the occupation. Development work is carried out in an atmosphere in which it will always involve responding to victims and will never be about basic rights and the need to address difficult situations. The situation is not assisted by the actions of Hamas, although it must be remembered that elections took place. Why are EU governments silent on the simple illegality of occupation and the expansion of Jerusalem, which has been expanded by an area one and a half times the size of Paris?

See this speech in context