I thank the Chairman for giving me the opportunity to address the committee. Your initiative is timely and important. GOAL is an agency which was set up in July 1977. Our objective is to alleviate the suffering of the poorest of the poor. We have responded to all major emergencies and disasters since Cambodia in 1978. We send professionals - doctors, engineers, accountants and nurses - and work closely with a large number of indigenous organisations and missionary orders. We have a very high regard for the missionary orders, the Irish people and others who have worked under our banner.
Since our inception we have worked in about 30 countries. The common thread running through all our activities is that we only concentrate on the poorest of the poor. We are not interested in dealing with anybody else, simply because we do not have the resources to do so. We have sent about 800 GOAL workers, most of whom are Irish, to work and risk their lives in many troubled and dangerous places. We have spent about £90 million during the period. Last year we spent about £14 million, of which half was donated by the Irish public. We are very proud of the fact that in our first 21 years in existence our administration costs average 5%. This compares to organisations such as the Agency for Personal Service Overseas which has administration costs of almost 40%. Many UN and multilateral agencies have staggeringly high administration costs.
Our first involvement with the Department of Foreign Affairs was in 1978 when we applied for and received a grant of £40,000 to build a malnutrition training centre in Calcutta. I am very pleased to say that the centre has turned out thousands of Indian women who have been trained in that discipline. It is a thriving operation to this day.
In 1999, the year in question, we received a fraction over £1 million, out of the budget of £181 million, from the Irish Government. We also get support from the governments of the United States, Britain, the Netherlands, Sweden - from a whole host of governments - as well as from the UN the EU and the BBC Comic Relief programme. We have received a great deal of praise, over many years, from various people who have visited our programmes, including George Bush senior, former President Mary Robinson, Kofi Annan, the Taoiseach, Deputy Ahern and his two immediate predecessors, Deputy David Andrews and many UN and EU personnel. We have not ever been criticised by anybody of that status who has visited our programmes.
Advocacy is another aspect of our work. Our main objective is to convince the Government of the day to become the champions of poor nations and speak out on behalf of the poor. We believe passionately that that is the greatest single action which Ireland can take. Irish missionaries and workers are making a phenomenal contribution, but even that could be surpassed if we can become the voice or standard bearer on this issue, taking advantage of Ireland's seat on the UN Security Council.
GOAL believes that, in order to reach the poor, one needs to have great love for them. People who have not got that love for the poor, should not be in the game, because dealing with the lives of human beings is too serious. To reach the people, that determination and love is essential, hence the success of the missionaries and volunteers as distinct from the highly paid professional, who fail because they lack this love and determination.
Why are we so passionate? Well, we see people die in their thousands and we see the indifference of the international community. That is why we become agitated about the lack of interest shown by governments throughout the world. Like others concerned in this area, I am delighted the Irish Government has decided to expand its programme from £200 million to £800 million. However, that also brings a huge responsibility.
The greatest single impediment to aid programmes, and value for money in such programmes, is corruption. No other word is more significant for the poor of the third world than corruption. It is endemic, it is institutionalised, it is everywhere one goes in the third world. People who decide to work in the third world without taking cognisance of corruption, would do as well to keep the money at home. I hope this committee will investigate how all moneys dispensed by the Department of Foreign Affairs are used and, if it finds that this new money is not guaranteed to reach the poor, it should be given back to the Minister for Finance. There are poor people in Ireland who can benefit from that money instead. It should not leave our shores to go to areas where poor people will not benefit.
Out of many possible examples of corruption in the third world, I will mention just one. In the past ten days, the presidents of three countries - the Philippines, Indonesia and Peru - were indicted for embezzlement, in terms of billions, not millions. That is not a unique occurrence. I have 18 files marked 'corruption', which anybody with two or three years to spare is welcome to read.
GOAL is concerned that the Department of Foreign Affairs appears to be determined to expand Irish aid spectacularly on a government-to-government basis and to the multi-national sector. We believe that philosophy is fraught with danger. We strongly advise that an independent, detailed and comprehensive audit be conducted before any additional funding is entered into. In terms of value for money, there are legitimate reasons for the Government to be concerned, about expanding in the two aid categories to which I have just referred.
GOAL believes that DFA should adopt very strict criteria and conditions in relation to government-to-government aid and should not deal with governments who have no regard for human rights, wage war against their neighbours, show no concern for the health and welfare of their own people, are patently undemocratic and have a history of ballot-rigging and other abuses. Let us look at some of the priority countries on which we lavish millions of pounds.
Ethiopia spent £2 million per day on its war effort at a time when its people were dying from starvation in their thousands. I was there and saw people dying before my very eyes, with no effort being made to help them by the Ethiopian government, who were too busy up in Eritrea. More than 100 students were mown down last week on the streets of Addis Ababa for protesting. There are more journalists in Addis Ababa jails than in any other African country, to our knowledge. Yet, Ethiopia is the biggest recipient of Irish Aid.
The President of Uganda was told last week by the UN Secretary-General that he was looting the country of Zaire, the Congo, and that he should get out. On the day he announced that he was having nothing more to do with the peace process in the Congo, he had 35,000 troops in that country. He also rigged his own elections, but the observers felt that he was going to win anyhow, so it did not matter. It is like saying that you can shoot your mother-in-law if you know she is dying of cancer and you will not be brought to judgment. Uganda received £19 million from the Irish Government and yet its president is spending a few £ million per day fighting a war. Why does he need money from us, if he has all that money to fight a war?
A recent report by a UN agency, UNDP, said that every sector of Tanzanian government society was corrupt from top to bottom.
Ireland gives a huge amount of money to UN agencies. There are some very good UN agencies with very good people in them. There are very good people in the World Bank, to which Ireland also gives a great deal of money. It has been said that this is like having a collection for Tony O'Reilly or Michael Smurfit. I do not think the World Bank really needs our millions when so many people are starving to death in the third world. What administration costs are involved here? Where is the value for money, compared to what the missionaries or the NGOs could do with that money?
GOAL maintains that not just 95%, but 100% of money allocated by DFA for the third world, should go to the third world - and to the poorest of the poor. If it does not, it should stay at home. I remain to be convinced that funding a centre for accounting studies in Lesotho, a hotel and tourism training institute in Zambia and a tourism master plan and human resource development in Tanzania, benefits the poor in those countries. I would argue with any economist, from Keynes down, that the 'trickle down' theory does not work. I was in Angola last week, which is one of the richest countries in the world, in terms of billionaires, both in the private sector and at government level. Yet, it is the second poorest country in the world. The people are the poorest, but a certain section possibly has more money than people in western countries and is wallowing in billions. Clearly, the 'trickle down' effect is not working in that country.
I argue strongly that Irish NGOs and missionaries, and indigenous NGOs whom we can identify throughout Africa, South-East Asia and India, give the best value for money and the safest vehicle for transferring Irish aid. We work directly with the poor, we have tiny administration costs and we are transparent and accountable. Irish Aid checked on our work in Gougeras in India last week and found that we had spent 96% of what they had given us on the ground in Gougeras, providing local employment, and 4% on administration. They got names of everybody who got the plastic sheeting and other supplies which we gave out. We have the backing of the Irish public, who until now have shown absolutely no interest in Irish aid, other than the amounts of money which they give to the Irish agencies and missionaries.
Perhaps there is a parallel with the national stadium issue, and the money involved is very similar. It has caused a huge furore. This £800 million will be allocated on a yearly basis. If Irish people find that money is not reaching the poor and is used to build up tourism in Zambia, they will not be terribly impressed. If there is a major scandal, which happens hourly in the Third World, it will affect not only Irish aid, but all of us who work in the Third World. Our sole agenda is to distribute aid to the poor of the Third World. If the money is not going to such people, it should be handed back to the Minister for Finance. An indepth investigation by the committee would be very worthwhile as it would reveal a lot of interesting aspects of Irish aid. A speaker has already mentioned AIDS and other health issues, but Ireland Aid money is given to a range of things that have absolutely nothing to do with the poor. Irish people have to be told where that money is going and, more importantly, why it is going there.
From my discussions with Deputies and Senators I know that they want the money to go to the poor. I know that those I deal with in Ireland want the money to go to the poor. Nobody wants to build up tourism in the countries concerned or take in people on fellowships from Africa to teach them hotel management skills. It is a regular occurrence that they go back to America in such cases instead of returning to their own countries. As an ordinary person, I would like to know why this happens. I understand value for money is central to the committee's terms of reference, but I cannot see how the practice I have outlined provides value for money. I thank the committee for its time, as I have said enough at this stage. I ask it to consider the money going to the Third World as we would consider how we would like money to be spent on our children if they were in need of the basics to survive.
