Ireland can be justly proud of the amount of money it puts into overseas development aid, but there are serious underlying difficulties about our other areas of activity, in terms of the environment, peacekeeping – I am glad he clarified that issue – and trade. We should be justifiably proud that we do not tie contractual obligations to overseas aid as do other countries. I wish to put that in perspective in case it may be seen as not being important. Rich countries send more than $50 billion a year in grants and low interest loans to poor nations. Normally these aid programmes are compared via crude sums of dollars disbursed or by total aid as a percentage of gross domestic product. However, there is tied aid to that, for example, the Canadian and Italian Governments may grant loans to a poor nation for highway construction but then require the recipient nation to hire a Canadian or Italian contractor to build the road, thus preventing the aid recipient from getting the best deal. In 2001, roughly two thirds of total international aid flows was tied. In the late 1990s, the US agency for international development reassured the US Congress that almost 80% of the agency's resources went to purchase US goods and services. That is a disgraceful statistic. The CDI aid ranking also subtracts interest payments that donor nations receive on prior loans, equivalent to about $4.7 billion in 2001. That is an indication of the underlying issues. It is not simply a matter of providing money, it is about how the money is channelled and how it is spent and Ireland has a proud record in that regard.