Paul Bradford (Fine Gael)

I welcome the Minister of State to the House. I am aware of his genuine personal commitment not only to the issue of Fairtrade but also the broader issue of development co-operation and the success of the Irish Aid programme worldwide. He has played a key role in that concept in both Houses during the past 20 years or so and it is very much at the centre of his political thinking.

When we speak about fair trade, which we all support, I like to discuss it in the broader concept of world trade, world development and our role in attempting to help develop the Third World. The work of Irish Aid in that regard has been a monumental success. It would be great if trade alone would solve the problem but there has to be support at the lowest possible level — direct financial aid and support — and Irish Aid plays a major role in that regard.

Over the years, through various parliamentary visits, I have been to places such as Malawi, Lesotho and Zambia. When one sees at first hand, on one side of the equation, the scale of the abject poverty, the poor governance and the lack of proper political structures and, at the other side of the equation, the work being done by the various charities, aid agencies and Irish Aid, in particular, one realises we are playing a constructive role. In regard to Fairtrade, its major success in recent years has been to engage and inform public opinion. That has been very helpful.

We are having this debate during the Lenten season. The work of Trócaire, in particular, over the past 25 to 30 years has been marvellous, not just from the concept of collecting and distributing money but from the perspective of getting people to reflect on trade, aid, human rights and civil rights worldwide. It is all part of the one equation and the one jigsaw. One cannot solve the problem unless all the pieces are in place.

I mentioned earlier the issue of governance, which may not be the most popular way of looking at the problem. When help is made available, be it through financial resources or grants of any description, it is important it is spent well and wisely. We cannot undersell the concept of good governance. One only has to look at the situation in Zimbabwe to see the disaster that occurs when a country is misgoverned. That is the greatest international tragedy at present. The old country of Rhodesia probably was discussed in this House and elsewhere almost weekly during the 1970s when it was politically necessary and popular to do so. The tragedy is that Zimbabwe does not get the attention it deserves and we need to put it back on the radar.

Senator Quinn spoke about the agriculture side of the equation. It was a continuance of our discussion at the Joint Committee on Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, a fortnight ago, when we had a presentation on a range of issues, including the world trade talks from the Irish Farmers' Association. There was something in the speech of the Minister of State which I thought was interesting and would have a certain resonance in Irish agriculture. He made the point that the prices being paid to farmers must be sufficient to cover their costs, provide them with a decent livelihood and allow enough of a surplus for investment in the future. Of course we agree with that view, but that relates not only to agriculture in the Third World but to agriculture at home.

The World Trade Organisation talks pose a genuine threat to Irish agriculture and Irish jobs. We could easily get carried away with the notion that progress in the WTO talks and progress in pushing through the Peter Mandelson formula somehow would be beneficial to the Third World. I say to my colleagues in the House that we have seen only one example of WTO policy imposed on this country, namely, the decision to close the Irish sugar industry. We were told its closure and the general slowdown of the sugar industry in Europe would be good for the Third World, that somehow the poorest of the poor in Africa would benefit from commercial decisions taken in Europe. What has happened is that a tiny number of growers in South America, in Brazil in particular, have benefited. Irish agriculture, Irish farmers and the Irish economy have lost one of our oldest natural industries but very few have benefited and certainly not the poorest of the poor.

The issue of trade, aid and so on relates to another debate we are having on genetically modified foods and feedstuffs. We sometimes portray ourselves as speaking from some high moral plateau. There is a prospect of the development of many new seed varieties which could transform agriculture and give real hope in parts of Africa which suffers continually from drought and the inability to grow crops. However, we in the EU are saying what can and cannot be done and what type of genetic modification can or cannot take place. We have no right to block the possible production of seed varieties which might well be a solution to some of the dreadful famines being endured by people in parts of Africa.

Unfortunately, I have drifted well beyond the issue of fair trade but it is all part of the equation. We all support Fairtrade. It is not the total answer by any means but it is certainly a help. We welcome and support all the Fairtrade towns but we also have to keep our eye on other parts of the same equation — the politics, the governance, the need to spread democracy, the need to help communities through direct grant aid and so on.

I congratulate the Minister of State, especially on the work being done by Irish Aid and the Government's commitment to increase funding to the Third World, which we have debated many times. At least we are increasing our national spend on aid and development, something I support very much. I hope we utilise it to the best advantage because the people of the Third World certainly need our continuing support. Fair trade is part of it but is not the whole equation.