asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if he will give an assessment of the effect of aid reduction on Irish development programmes in Lesotho, Zambia, Sudan and Tanzania.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Development Programme Aid Reductions.
25.
The Deputy will be aware that the amount of the allocation proposed for the Bilateral Aid Programme administered by my Department is £2.275 million for the current year which is less than the allocation last year, £2.8 million. The grant-in-aid for the Agency for Personal Service Overseas (APSO) remains at the same level as last year, that is £600,000.
As I have already made clear in statements on the subject, the reduction in the amount of funds available for bilateral aid will entail that the emphasis in the programme, which is concentrated mainly in the four priority countries referred to by the Deputy, will be on the consolidation and evaluation of existing programmes rather than expansion this year. Thus, while it is my intention to maintain commitments carried over from previous years in respect of individual projects administered by my Department or on behalf of my Department, it is not envisaged that any new commitments be entered into in the current year. Furthermore my Department will keep all ongoing projects under close review to enable the maximum possible economies to be effected.
Does the Minister accept that the cut-backs referred to are in clear breach of earlier commitments to move this country towards the aim of attaining the .7 per cent GNP UN recommendation on the official development assistance?
We are going to curtail further development. There is no question of reneging on existing commitments. There will be a curtailment of further development.
Could I ask the Minister, without getting into definitions of "curtailment"——
On further development.
The Minister is talking about further developments in these four countries of concentration. I am talking about the commitment which was given to increase our official development assistance over a period of years, so that we would reach the UN recommendation of .7 per cent of GNP. Does the Minister not accept, first, that the step which has now been taken is a major reneging on that commitment and, secondly, that this is going to have a very serious effect on the development programmes already under way in these four countries referred to?
I am going to be quite candid with the Deputy and the House. This is a situation where we very properly and rightly are doing, as has been done in many other countries, cutting our cloth according to our measure.
Would the Minister agree that this latest step is totally consistent with the Government's policy against the poorer man?
Do I understand the Minister's reply to confirm and put officially on the record of this House that none of the projects currently in hand in Lesotho will be reduced or abandoned in the coming year? Is the Minister giving this House that categorical and non-hypothetical assurance?
I am not giving the House any assurance, other than that the existing work in progress and commitments in relation to existing work in progress will be maintained and to say that in regard to our total allocation covering all agencies, governmental agencies, bilateral aid and subscriptions channelled through the EEC by reason of our commitments under the Lomé Convention and our commitments under the UN, taking a total view of all our commitments, our expenditure is up by 12 per cent this year over last year.
Not the voluntary ones?
Would the Minister not agree that there were two options open to his Department, one was to maintain at the level of 1980 spending our commitment from last year and to reduce our on-going commitments via the EDF and the World Bank contributions and could he explain to the House why it was that he chose to reduce our commitments to the bilateral aid programme and not our commitments in relation to the EDF, where they have never fully taken up the allocation in any given year?
We are doing substantial work, particularly under Lomé 2, and have substantial commitments under the other agencies mentioned by the Deputy. Irish firms are benefiting from this investment by us through these agencies and our commitment to invest through these agencies in development aid is of very prime importance. That is why our level in that area should be maintained. In the overall level between aid, taking the two areas, mandatory and non-mandatory, obligatory and nonobligatory, the total aid percentage is up by 12 per cent this year.
Could I ask the Minister——
Could I ask one last question?
One at a time, please, Deputies. Deputy Quinn to finish.
I am not clear what the Minister means by the word "maintained". Could I ask him to clarify that and could he indicate to the House whether any existing projects currently on the ground in Lesotho will be curtailed or reduced in terms of their expenditure or their activities in 1980?
The existing work being done will be maintained. We are not going to proceed with works that had been planned to be done. That is the point.
With the indulgence of the Chair, could I ask the Minister——
We are pursuing this matter into argument.
There are a lot of people with less money than those in this country. Will the level of service actually be reduced, not abandoned?
I use the word "maintained" advisedly—maintained at the same level.
Very advisedly.
Could I ask the Minister one question to which I should like a clear, specific reply? Arising out of the Minister's reference to cutting our cloth according to our measure, would the Minister now indicate what is the Government commitment, if any, in regard to bridging the gap between the amount of official development assistance which we are giving and the UN recommendation of .7 per cent of GNP?
What we are doing this year in this area is in line with what every European country is doing at present, by reason of budgetary constraints. It is a fact of life that in this world, where we have been committing ourselves extensively to the Third World, this world is now under severe financial pressure caused by the oil producing countries, some of whom are in the Third World. This is a realistic fact of life facing every country in western Europe and north America.
The Arabs did not ask us to abandon the wealth tax.
Every country in western Europe, all our community partners, every country in north America——
The Dutch?
——are adopting the same attitude——
The Swedes?
——of constraint by reason of budgetary pressures this year. That is the really important matter as far as western Europe and north America are concerned. We should be of very little assistance to the Third World if we go under financially and economically.
With the permission of the Ceann Comhairle——
We cannot follow this matter up all day.
All I want is the Minister's reply to my question. I got his apology for the reduction this year. Could I ask the Minister is there now any Government commitment in regard to bridging the gap between the percentages?
There is. There is a commitment within the resources available to us.
When?
(Interruptions.)
That is no commitment and the Minister knows it.
What sort of commitment is the Deputy asking an Irish Government to make?
That is no commitment. That is nothing. Did the Minister ever read what his predecessor had to say about this?
Question No. 26, please.