Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 17 Jun 1980

Vol. 322 No. 5

International Development Association (Amendment) Bill, 1980: Second Stage.

I move "That the Bill be now read a Second Time".

The purpose of the Bill is to authorise a voluntary contribution of £6,230,000 by the Irish Government to the sixth replenishment of the resources of the International Development Association.

The association was established in 1960 to help finance development projects and programmes in the poorest developing countries. It is one of the organisations that make up the World Bank Group, the others being the World Bank itself and the International Finance Corporation. Membership of the World Bank is a prerequisite for membership of the association. Day-to-day management of the association is handled by its management and staff, under the President of the Bank Group, Mr. Robert McNamara. The management report to an executive board of 20 directors elected by the bank's member countries. Policy matters are decided by the board of governors of the association which consists of one governor for each member country. The association has 122 member countries at present.

As the association's resources are limited, relative to the needs of its less well-off member countries, priority is given to the very poorest countries. Thus, nearly 90 per cent of the association's lending goes to countries where large sections of the population have per capita incomes of, on average, £100 a year. In some of the countries per capita income would be less than half this amount. The association helps by financing projects aimed at raising agricultural output and also by supporting investment in roads, telecommunications, water supply and other infrastructural improvements that are essential to economic growth. The association's loans are on highly concessional conditions—50-year repayment periods, no repayments for the first ten years and no interest charges. The projects financed by the association must, of course, be economically and financially viable and must meet the same standards as those required by the World Bank itself. Unlike loans given by the association, lending by the World Bank is essentially on commercial terms and the International Finance Corporation also provides equity and loan finance on an essentially commercial basis.

The International Development Association obtains its financial resources in a number of ways. The principal method is through periodic replenishments provided by its richer member countries, also known as Part I countries. The other member countries are known as Part II members and a number of these also participate in the replenishments. The resources made available to the association to date comprise, in round figures, initial membership subscriptions amounting to $1 billion, transfers from the surplus income of the World Bank of $1½ billion, and replenishments of nearly $18½ billion.

Ireland joined the association on its foundation in 1960, and subscribed $3 million to the initial capital. This country did not contribute to the first or second of the three-yearly replenishments of resources, but made a contribution of $4 million to the third replenishment. Ireland was still a Part II member at that time. Ireland became a Part II member in 1973, because of the economic progress which had been made over the previous decade, and because of our membership of the EEC. All the other EEC members, and most OECD member countries, hold Part I status. It was accepted that this would involve a continuing commitment to contribute towards the financing of the association. As a Part I member, Ireland contributed £3.1 million to the fourth replenishment and £5.8 million to the fifth replenishment.

Negotiations on the current replenishment—the sixth replenishment—began at the end of 1978 and concluded towards the end of last year. The negotiations agreed on an overall amount of £12 billion for the replenishment. This represents an increase of 55 per cent in US dollar terms over the amount of the fifth replenishment. The vast bulk of the funds will be provided by Part I countries. The basic principle adopted in the allocation of contributions among these countries was that each would maintain in this replenishment the same share as it had taken in the fifth replenishment, with a number of exceptions in the case of some major contributors. The allocations have been made on the understanding that commitments to them are not final until approval has, where necessary, been obtained from the legislature of each donor country. The outcome of the sixth replenishment negotiations has recently been approved by the association's board of governors. The replenishment will enter into force when member countries contributing 80 per cent of the total replenishment formally notify the association that they will pay their allocated amounts.

As for previous replenishments, donor countries have the right initially to substitute non-negotiable, non-interest-bearing demand notes for cash payments. The notes, denominated in the member's currency, are to be deposited over the three years 1980 to 1982. Actual cash payments under the replenishment will arise over the years 1981 to 1990. The precise rate at which the funds are called upon will depend on the progress made in implementing the projects financed by the replenishment.

As a Part I member of the association, Ireland is, as I have said earlier, expected to contribute to the periodic replenishments. In accordance with the sharing arrangements agreed in the negotiations the Government have indicated that, subject to legislative approval, they are prepared to contribute the amount appropriate to Ireland, that is £6,230,000. The contribution will count as part of our official development assistance.

Ireland's membership of the association is covered by the International Development Association Act, 1960. As in the case of earlier replenishments the Bill now before the House makes provision, by way of amendment to the 1960 Act, for our contribution to the latest replenishment. The proposed amendment also brings together the earlier payments provisions in the 1960 Act and those inserted by the subsequent amending Acts.

This Bill, when enacted, will, therefore, enable Ireland to maintain its role in helping to finance the work of the International Development Association and, through it, to continue to assist some of the poorest developing countries around the world.

I recommend the Bill for the approval of the House.

We are dealing here this evening with the matter of our contribution to the International Development Association, which contribution will count as part of our official development assistance. Therefore this Bill affords us an opportunity of looking at Ireland's role, not just in the matter of the International Development Association but also in the context of its view and policy on official development assistance.

That is a separate matter.

Since we are dealing with the matter of official development assistance, this contribution being part of it, it is important to point out that the present Government, by reneging on their commitments, have severely damaged the good work developed so well by voluntary and official agencies in recent years. Furthermore they have tar nished the name of Ireland abroad and brought disgrace to this nation. Those are hard words but I feel they need to be said.

This is the first opportunity I have had of discussing this issue in this House. In regard to the Bill before the House, while expressing the aforesaid views I will be voicing the support of my party for the Bill because it is the policy of my party to ensure that the contributions made by the State by way of official development assistance be increased so that Ireland can hold its head high among the nations of the world in that regard. The situation in regard to official development assistance as far as this country is concerned will not be saved I am afraid, by the provisions of this Bill. We are in a situation in which the moneys that will ultimately be payable under this Bill will not in fact be paid this year at all and, therefore, will not in any way rescue the situation the present Government have allowed develop.

Quite simply the situation today is that if the Government met their specific commitments, given in this House and outside it, our total payments by way of official development assistance—loosely called aid to the Third World—in this year would be of the order of £21 million, whereas the figure is £16 million only, there being a shortfall of £5 million. Even if that figure were paid this year we would not have a whole lot to be proud of because we would still be well short of the commitment which this country, along with the other developed countries, made at the United Nations to contribute 7 per cent of GNP by way of official development assistance. At the same time there has been an improvement in this regard in recent years. This improvement started from a baseline in 1973, when the Coalition Government came into power, at which stage the level of aid was .036 per cent, a percentage that was less than that in the year 1960 when Ireland first joined the International Development Association. That was the position facing the Coalition Government when they assumed office in 1973. Because of a positive policy and commitment by the Government at that time that figure was substantially increased over the years.

May I say, in that regard, that the moneys voted by way of increases for official development assistance—which included earlier moneys which were voted under the International Development Association (Amendment) Bills of 1973, or 1974, and 1977—were supported by the Opposition of the day. The outlook at that time was that we should be doing better. Furthermore, there was a specific commitment given in this House by the then Opposition spokesman on Foreign Affairs. I had hoped that Deputy O'Kennedy, who was then Opposition spokesman on Foreign Affairs and who was until recently Minister for Foreign Affairs, would have been presenting this Bill here this evening. The Bill, even though presented by the present Minister for Foreign Affairs, falls within the ambit of the Department of Finance. Without absolving the present Minister in any way, the specific commitments given by the Fianna Fáil Party in the past were given by Deputy O'Kennedy. I might mention the terms of that commitment. On 27 February 1975 Deputy O'Kennedy said in this House, and I quote from Volume 278, column 1372 of the Official Report:

...we commit ourselves to ensuring that, irrespective of our budgetary or balance of payments problems, we shall set aside year after year the appropriate sum to ensure that we reach at least the target set by the Minister—0.35 per cent of our GNP within five years.

That was the stated view of Deputy O'Kennedy, then Opposition spokesman on Foreign Affairs, speaking on behalf of his party in this House.

The figures for official development assistance were increased substantially during the term of the Coalition Government. In fairness to the present administration, they have maintained that momentum over the last couple of years which gave cause for hope to those with an interest or a commitment in the Third World, and to those with a belief that it is in the interests of mankind that there should be a proper level of aid to the Third World. Unfortunately, that momentum was not alone slowed down but set back in the current year. The former Minister for Foreign Affairs took over the Department of Finance and now holds the purse strings. While not in any way absolving the present Minister, Deputy O'Kennedy is the person I would like to be addressing here tonight. That is the background to the situation we face today.

As I said, there has been a very substantial reduction in real terms in voluntary aid. The only increases of any consequence granted were because of international obligations we could not get out of. This is a sad day for this country and for this administration. It may appear to the present Government that there are not any votes in the Third World, but this is not a matter which could be considered in terms of votes. There are many hundreds of thousands of people in this country who year in and year out make their voluntary donations in this area. These figures have been increasing in the current year in contrast to the record of the present administration. These people will form their own conclusions and will come to their own decisions about what to think of a Government who renege on such an important area.

The whole question of official development assistance should not be discussed in a political context. There should be a commitment by the entire nation—backed by the people but given a lead by the Government and supported by the Opposition—to do our very best in this area, because we are not doing it at the moment. The present situation is that in those areas where the Government had power to cut back from the point of view of contributions to United Nation bodies, such as the Commission for Refugees, there was a cut of 24 per cent.

The Chair has given the Deputy a lot of latitude in view of the close relationship between the subject matters, but he is not now discussing the Bill before the House, which is very restricted.

I appreciate your viewpoint but——

We could have a very broad debate on associated matters but that is not what this Bill is about.

I suggest I should be in order talking about official development assistance because we are putting through legislation which will enable the Government to discharge their future obligations from the point of view of the payment of official development assistance. The fact that we classify aid as a payment through the International Development Association is not really of consequence because all forms of official development assistance are channelled through different national and multinational agencies. It is in that context——

Quite a few of them are covered by different legislation. However, the Deputy may go ahead.

I will not stray too far from the point——

I would rather we kept more closely to the Bill.

I guarantee that I will keep to the question of international development assistance and where the money is going. These moneys hopefully will ultimately reach the Third World. When discussing this Bill we have to look at the present situation in the Third World, see the problems there and what we should be doing about them. I might ask if we are doing enough under this Bill, although my view is that of course we should discharge our obligations and our payments should be made in different areas.

This Bill is mainly related to funds for the association which will help in the financing of projects of an agricultural and infrastructural nature. The forte of this country is in the area of personnel, helping in the developing of these countries by providing people who are experienced from the point of view of the work being done by volunteers from different State agencies who have gone out to help in establishing transport and electricity undertakings, providing nurses, doctors, teachers and so on. This is an area where we have a particular strength. At the same time we have to look at the problems with which we are trying to cope. It was in that context that I was looking at the question of refugees. This is a very big problem in the Third World—ten million and increasing. Mention was made today about the number who fled from the Soviet aggression in Afghanistan. They are now taking refuge in Pakistan and so on.

When we in the country talk about assistance to the Third World and aid through official development assistance, we have to look at this question in a broad context, appreciate the effects of the policies now being adopted, the welshing on the commitments already made and how that will set back the work that has been done over the last number of years, which is hopefully not suffering a mortal blow but which will be set back for many years. It is in that context and not in a political context that I take this opportunity to develop the point and to speak on this area. Whatever is said, there is no doubt that this work will suffer a very severe blow in the current year.

I will not bore the House with detailed statistics of the various bodies involved in this kind of work. We have already been given some of these figures—the number of people working in Kenya and Tanzania, the number that cannot be increased, the projects that will have to be slowed down or abandoned and the new projects which have been planned and are ready to proceed in the current year but which will have to be stopped. The moneys we are asking the Government to spend in this area are relatively small, but the influence which they bring in the Third World is very large indeed. When there is a reneging on those commitments the damage caused thereby is therefore that much greater and this is already evidenced by reports from countries where we have been concentrating aid, such as Tanzania and Lesotho, as well as other countries where we have been making a small effort in recent years.

The suggestion that the problem in regard to bilateral aid might be resolved, as suggested by the Minister on 24 April, has not met with any favourable response from anybody who has knowledge and experience in this area. I was questioning the Minister as to whether there was any prospect of an increase in bilateral aid—I am forewarning him that the matter may arise again in the near future—and he suggested that there could be a possibility of a transfer of funds from the multilateral to the bilateral programme. People with whom I have discussed this matter indicate very strongly that this certainly would not be a solution.

They do not know what they are talking about.

We must get back to the Bill before the House, which does not cover the whole field of aid to the Third World.

I do not claim to be an expert in this area but I have discussed it with people who seem to be experts and I have read much documentation about it. The Minister is quite entitled to suggest that these people involved in voluntary organisations do not know what they are talking about and, perhaps with more justification, that I as Opposition spokesman do not know what I am talking about. Let people draw their own conclusions.

I have talked to the people concerned and they are delighted with what I suggest. I had a very full meeting with them only the other day.

That is a difference of opinion which hardly arises on this Bill.

The Deputy must not be talking to the right people. Of course they are interested in getting a transfer of funds.

This seems to be a matter for discussion another time. I have a letter from Comhladh saying that they are totally opposed to what the Minister proposes in this regard.

Totally opposed to getting money?

They are suggesting that the Minister should live up to his commitments and give proper funding to the bilateral aid programme. They are opposed to the suggestion made by the Minister that the shortfall in bilateral aid might be made up by way of a transfer of funds from the multilateral to the bilateral programme.

The Deputy is trespassing on the generosity of the Chair. It is very interesting but it is not relevant to the Bill before the House.

I appreciate that this is not a matter for decision here tonight but it may be a matter for discussion at another time.

The moneys are going to the International Development Association who concentrate their lending on countries where large sections of the population have a low per capita income. Obviously this must be supported. In the past aid has resulted in the relatively rich in these countries getting richer and the aid did not percolate through to where it was most needed. It was a theory during the sixties that there would be a seepage and that aid to the wealthier people would percolate through to the weaker sections of the community. The International Development Association are carrying out work which will help in providing the basic needs of the population in general and money is being spent on projects aimed at raising agricultural output, improving communications and water supplies and so on. I support this entirely, while at the same time making the distinction in regard to the type of aid in which we can specialise which deals more with people, an area in which we are particularly good. It is right and proper that we, along with the other developed nations, should contribute and pay our share towards bodies such as the International Development Association to enable them to disburse their funds and provide the facilities which are so badly needed by the poorer sections in these countries.

It is relevant to bear in mind the history of this association. The Minister mentioned in his speech the fact that we joined in 1960 but we did not contribute thereafter to the earlier replenishments and this was an unfortunate attitude on the part of the Government of the day. I would point out that we became qualified as a Part I member in 1973. It is no coincidence that this was the year in which the Coalition came into office. There was a dramatic change in our policy in all matters of official development assistance and aid to the Third World. In the intervening years we have provided the amounts which, if not legally, we are morally bound to pay to the International Development Association. In broad terms the amount may seem small enough in the context of the figure of $ 12 billion which is quoted for the overall replenishment.

Debate adjourned.
Top
Share