John Deasy (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 5: To ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs if he will introduce legislation to ensure that 0.7% of gross national product is devoted to overseas development aid; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [21951/09]

Peter Power (Limerick East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Over the past decade Ireland's spending on Official Development Aid, ODA, has witnessed extraordinary growth. The figures speak for themselves. In 2000 our total contribution to ODA was €250 million - by 2008 this had grown to €918 million. At the start of the decade we contributed 0.3% of our GNP to ODA - last year we contributed 0.58%. By any measure this is an extraordinary success and one that we should be all justifiably proud of.

This is only half the story, however. The quality of the Irish Aid development programme is internationally renowned and recognised as being one of the best and most effective donor programmes - firmly focused on the reduction of poverty and hunger and on the least developed countries, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa.

The programme has been validated, once again, as recently as earlier this month in the OECD Development Assistance Committee peer review - the pre-eminent international body in benchmarking donors against aid quality. The report highlights that "Ireland is a champion in making aid more effective" and that "Irish Aid is a strong cutting edge development programme". These are the views of an independent, objective and critical international aid organisation from which we can draw pride. I am aware that there have been calls to put the 0.7% target of GNP on ODA on a legislative basis. I do not believe that the time is appropriate for such a course of action. The Government remain convinced that the best way to safeguard the gains made to Ireland's aid programme is to restore public finances and establish a solid platform for renewed growth in the future.

For the record, total ODA for 2009 will be €696 million. Based on current estimates, this represents 0.48% of estimated GNP, which should mean that Ireland will retain its position as the world's sixth largest donor on a per capita basis. Our aid programme remains one of the best in the world. We retain our core values of supporting the world's poorest in a way that builds capacity and addresses the fundamental causes of poverty. Our growth trajectory will recommence as soon as our economic circumstances permit.

John Deasy (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Mr. Gay Mitchell, MEP, who is a member of the European Parliament's Committee on Development, recently made a suggestion in respect of this matter. The Minister of State quoted the OECD report. I accept that the marks out of ten for the Government and Irish Aid in respect of the work they have done were extremely high. However, the OECD expressed one main concern with regard to the type of cuts being made and the amount of money being removed from the overseas development budget and recommended that these cuts should not be made.

There is a mechanism by means of which the Government could honour its commitment, satisfy the OECD and demonstrate that the speeches its members have made during the past five to ten years were not empty. There is a way it can end the ambiguity it has demonstrated. It can do so by legislating to ensure that 0.7% of GNP will be devoted to the overseas development budget.

Peter Power (Limerick East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We share the concern expressed in the OECD report to the effect that these targets are more difficult to make in the current environment. We want to meet these targets and it is our ambition to do so. We have a goal towards which we are working. The question that arises relates to the precise mechanism to be used and the path to be followed in order that we might meet our aid commitments.

The mechanism put forward by Mr. Gay Mitchell, MEP, would have to be considered in the context of any particular Government programme. If we were to apply it to a wide range of Government Departments, there would be complete inflexibility regarding the way in which we deliver our spending programmes throughout the year. In effect, the Government would be running on autopilot and there would be no need for Question Time because we would have locked ourselves into an exact growth path. In order to meet the targets to which we have committed ourselves, which are referred to in the OECD report, we must ensure that our public finances are sustainable and that we provide the conditions for economic growth. These are an absolute prerequisite to expanding the aid programme again. In the absence of sustainable public finances and suitable conditions for economic growth, one could not - even if they were enshrined in legislation - reach one's targets.

John Deasy (Waterford, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

This begs the question as to how the Minister of State defines the word "commitment". He will forgive me for reaching the conclusion that the commitment the Government made means nothing and never did.

Peter Power (Limerick East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I cannot accept the Deputy's assertion. Ours is a firm commitment. He must remember that this commitment relates to a period of 12 to 15 years and that we are three years ahead of the European Union in this regard. The decisions we made over a period of nine months - which have been severe in their impact - must be considered in the context of our commitment being long-term in nature. These decisions, albeit it difficult and made in the short term, have the sole objective of ensuring that when our commitments in respect of donating a percentage of our GNP are met, that GNP will have been produced by a sustainable and growing economy. Not to make those decisions now would mean that our commitments really are meaningless.