Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 4 Dec 1980

Vol. 325 No. 3

United Nations Industrial Development Organisation: Motion.

Minister for Foreign Affairs (Mr. Lenihan)

I move:

That Dáil Éireann approves the terms of the constitution of the United Nations Industrial Development Organisation (UNIDO) adopted in Vienna on 8 April 1979.

The United Nations Industrial Development Organisation, or UNIDO as it is generally known, was established on 1 January 1967 as a result of a resolution adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 17 November 1966. It was established with the aim of promoting and accelerating the industrialisation of the developing countries. Its mandate also makes the organisation responsible for co-ordinating within the United Nations system all activities relating to industrialisation in the developing countries.

Mr. P. Barry

It is very hard to hear the Minister.

An Ceann Comhairle

Order please.

Mr. Lenihan

UNIDO is an integral part of the United Nations Organisation and all member states of the United Nations, together with those belonging to the United Nations specialised agencies and the International Atomic Energy Agency, are eligible for membership of UNIDO's international industrial development board. As at present constituted the board consist of 45 members which are chosen by the UN General Assembly on the basis of equitable geographic representation.

In fulfilling its mandate UNIDO provides assistance to developing countries wishing to formulate industrial policies, to establish new industries, including agro-based or agro-related industries, or to improve existing ones. It undertakes various operational activities including measures for effective application of modern methods of industrial production, programming and planning; development, adaptation and transfer of technology to developing countries; and training of personnel. The organisation assists developing countries in obtaining external financing for industrial projects and assists in establishing contacts between industrialised and developing countries with the aim of promoting co-operation in the field of industrialisation.

UNIDO at present derives its finances from a number of sources. Expenses for administrative and research activities — approximately 33 million dollars a year — are borne by the regular budget of the United Nations. Technical assistance activities are financed mainly by the United Nations Development Programme, to which Ireland contributes directly. In 1979 total project expenditures on technical co-operation programmes amounted to an estimated 70 million dollars of which the United Nations Development Programme provided over 51 million dollars, the UN Regular Programme of Technical Assistance, 3.8 million dollars and the United Nations Industrial Development Fund and other agencies over 15 million dollars. Ireland contributes regularly to the United Nations Development Programme and in 1979 a contribution of £35,000 was made to the United Nations Industrial Development Fund.

The Second General Conference of UNIDO, held in Lima, Peru, in March 1975, recommended to the General Assembly of the United Nations that the organisation, UNIDO, should be converted into a specialised agency in order that its autonomy and functions be increased and expanded so that it might intensify and extend its activities. The conference considered that UNIDO had a crucial role to play in implementing the United Nations Declaration and Programme of Action on the establishment of a new international economic order and that it should serve as a forum for negotiations in the field of industry between developed and developing countries and between developing countries themselves.

The United Nations General Assembly, in a resolution adopted at its seventh special session in September 1975, endorsed the conversion of UNIDO into a specialised agency. Following lengthy discussions among the member states of the United Nations over a three-year period agreement on a Constitution for UNIDO as a specialised agency was reached on 8 April 1979.

In accordance with the new constitution the primary objective of UNIDO shall be the promotion and acceleration of industrial development in the developing countries with a view to assisting in the establishment of a new international economic order. The organisation will also promote industrial development and co-operation on global, regional and national as well as on sectoral levels. In fulfilment of these objectives UNIDO will take all necessary and appropriate action and will encourage and extend assistance to the developing countries in the promotion and acceleration of their industrialisation, in particular in the development, expansion and modernisation of their industries by encouraging development and planning techniques, acting as a forum for contact between all countries organising training programmes and promoting and assisting in the development, selection, adaptation, transfer and use of technology, having regard for the specific requirements of particular industries.

The principal organs of UNIDO when its constitution enters into force will be the General Conference, the Industrial Development Board, the Programme and Budget Committee and the Secretariat.

The general conference will consist of all the member States, while the industrial development board shall consist of 53 members, and the programme and budget committee of 27 members, with due regard, in both cases, to the principle of equitable geographic distribution.

The Constitution provides that UNIDO's regular budget will be borne by the member states, as apportioned in accordance with a scale of assessment established by the conference. This will result in a corresponding reduction in the UN regular budget in respect of UNIDO. The scale of assessment for UNIDO's budget will be based to the extent possible on the scale most recently used by the United Nations. On this basis, Ireland would be assessed at the rate of 0.16 per cent. Provision also exists for voluntary contributions to the organisation.

Provision in the Constitution exists for allowing UNIDO to enter into agreements establishing appropriate relationships with other organisations of the United Nations system and with other intergovernmental and governmental organisations and there is also provision for the settlement of any disputes which might arise among members of the organisation.

Membership of the organisation is open to "all States which associate themselves with the objectives and principles of the Organisation".

The Constitution was open for signature by member states of the United Nations at the Austrian Foreign Ministry, in Vienna, until 7 October 1979 and may now be signed at UN Headquarters in New York until it enters into force. Article 26 of the Constitution provides that it shall be subject to ratification, acceptance or approval by signatory States. The Constitution will enter into force when at least eighty states that have deposited instruments of ratification acceptance or approval notify the Depositary (the UN Secretary-General) that they have agreed that it will enter into force. Up to the present time, the Constitution has been signed by 89 States and has already been ratified by 18.

Ireland has collaborated with UNIDO in a number of areas since it was established and we would hope to increase our collaboration with the new UNIDO in the future. As a country with a relatively recent history of industrialisation, we are particularly suited to help with many of the problems which developing countries at an initial stage of their industrialisation process have to face.

I would like to mention two examples of co-operation with UNIDO, which illustrate this point. UNIDO have a programme of assistance in industrial free-zone operation and for a number of years, the Shannon Free Airport Development Company (SFADCo) have been associated with this programme, mainly in the areas of consultancy work and training. Courses usually cover project appraisal, foreign investment, small-scale industrial and entrepreneurial development. These aspects are of particular importance to countries at an early stage of development. Another example is the work in which Bord na Móna are involved in Rwanda. That country is rich in peat reserves. Ireland has the technical expertise and know-how for the exploitation of this important resource in a small, poor, land-locked country. In collaboration with UNIDO and with funds from the Bilateral Aid Programme of my Department, a beginning has been made. Extraction and processing of peat is now under way on a pilot basis. When production becomes more mechanised on a larger scale, it will mean substantial savings on energy costs for Rwanda.

I am glad to note that UNIDO plans to give more attention to Africa's industrial needs in the coming decade. The developing countries there face a growing imbalance in imports of manufactured goods over exports. Increasing dependence on imported oil, consumer goods and foodstuffs has created enormous debt problems for the poorer countries. Given that our own bilateral aid programme is concentrated in a number of African countries, we have a particular interest in African needs and Africa's future. We welcome the UNIDO emphasis on Africa, therefore, and look forward to more extensive and fruitful collaboration with that organisation in the years ahead.

There can be no doubt that a greater meshing of bilateral and multilateral efforts on a regional and local basis is required in Africa, as elsewhere. We have taken great care to ensure that our bilateral projects fit in with the development plans in the various countries. It is up to the multilateral agencies to provide a wider framework, one which will enable individual countries to see their development in relation to whole regions and make more realistic assessments of their situation. While many of the poorer regions will have to concentrate in the immediate future on basic requirements, especially food and rural development, this does not altogether exclude industrial development. In fact, if their food and agricultural sector is to be placed on a sound footing in the longterm, they must lay the foundations for industrial growth also. The latter cannot simply be put off, even if a particular country consciously wished to do so. The important thing is to find the right balance and then to obtain what is required in the way of inputs.

In one sense, developing countries at this stage have a certain advantage, in that a multilateral framework both for aid and advice now exists. And this is vitally important for them. It helps to provide them with a second opinion as it were, enabling them to take a more objective view of bilateral inputs and co-operation. This is a healthy situation provided that the individual recipient country itself is allowed to make its own choices, and provided that the multilateral and bilateral frameworks remain areas of co-operation, not of competition.

It only remains for me to say that the growing emphasis, within the UN system generally, on the industrialisation needs of developing countries is to be welcomed. In the years to come, UNIDO will have a vital role to play. As I have said many times of late, the problems of developing countries are now the problems of all countries. The only real solutions in future will be global ones. The choice for all is a relatively simple one and it derives from the basic fact of interdependence. Either we use that interdependence to overcome the mutual problem of economic ill-health or we allow ourselves to become the victims of a relationship between developed and developing countries which dooms both sides to economic stagnation and despair.

I recommend the motion to the House.

Mr. O'Keeffe

I apologise for not being present at the beginning of the Minister's speech. I had assumed that statements on the recent Summit meeting would take priority this morning. In relation to this motion, I wish to voice the approval of the Opposition. Certainly we on the Fine Gael benches approve the Government's support of the Constitution of UNIDO.

This motion gives us an opportunity to look at the activities of UNIDO in the context of our overall approach to the developing countries. It was established to promote and accelerate the industrialisation of developing countries. Only 7 per cent of the world's industrial production comes from the developing world and it is clear that this huge imbalance is such that unless aid is given to help to increase that figure substantially not only will the developing countries suffer but ultimately all the countries of the world will suffer. The objective originally outlined at the Lima meeting in 1975 was to increase that percentage to 25 per cent by the end of the century. In view of the record of aid over the past few years it seems unlikely that anything like that percentage will be achieved. At the same time we must support any moves towards that aim.

The Minister points out that there will be an increasing concentration on Africa where we have a substantial bilateral interest. However, one would not wish to see the exclusion of developing countries in other parts of the world, especially in Central and South America.

With the increasing complexity of aid operations, there is a great need not just for legislators but for the public in general to be informed as to exactly what is going on and what the different organisations are doing. Only by an increasing education programme can we get public support for a greater commitment by the Government towards achieving the UN target. I would venture a guess that not one in a hundred people would know what UNIDO was and it seems that we are not doing our duty in this House in discussing the intricacies of this organisation and then leaving it at that. I am more and more convinced that the question of informing the public as to exactly how the problem of aid is being tackled on an international basis is of prime importance.

I am remainded of the fact that the Dutch, who have a very good aid record, are well ahead of the United Nations target of. 7 per cent of GNP; they are up to 1 per cent. They spent a major share of their budget ensuring that the public are fully informed of what is happening. As a result there is substantial public support for the aid programme implemented by the Dutch government, not just the present government but the last government which changed in 1977.

Mr. Quinn

We were not the only people to suffer misfortune.

Mr. O'Keeffe

I understand it is likely there will be a change there as well as here next year. The complexities are not just related to the multiplicity of organisations involved but to the actual difficulty in getting aid to where it is most needed, to ensuring that such aid is put to best effect and to exploring and understanding the problems, due to lack of infrastructure in the countries in receipt of aid.

This situation is highlighted by the present situation in Italy, which is not a backward country. Yet they seem to have tremendous difficulty in coping with the aftermath of the earthquake and ensuring that the goodwill of other nations, related into aid, reaches those who are so much in need. These problems are multiplied a hundredfold in those countries which do not have the facilities which exist in Italy — proper road and telephone systems and a civil service which should be geared to deal with emergency situations.

These are only a few of the problems that arise in regard to this motion — to provide help to promote industrial development in the Third World. Some people here might assume that if they wanted to help a Third World country all they would have to do is provide extra assistance to a local IDA in that country, but such structures do not exist in most of these countries. In many cases the civil service is inadequate and there is very often a real problem of communication. I am told that in some of these countries where projects are reasonably successful in rural areas the local people who become very proficient in putting the projects through are almost automatically asked by their respective Governments to come into the civil service and are withdrawn from the areas where they have been achieving a lot of benefit.

These are just a few of the difficulties that arise in having a proper aid programme. Perhaps they point to the need for having a multiplicity of organisations with specialised knowledge involved in those programmes. At some stage, perhaps even now, questions will be asked about whether there is a need for all these organisations. I believe many specialised organisations are set up to fill a special need and there is no examination as to the basis for their continuance. At some time in the international sphere there will have to be a close examination of all these international organisations to ensure that they are not just existing but to see if they have outlived their usefulness and if a certain amount of rationalisation might be of benefit.

The real point I want to make in this debate is that I believe there is a need for a greater effort to be made to inform our people of the need for aid to the Third World and the complexities involved in getting such aid to the Third World. From that point of view, we have to look at what we are doing in this area. I appreciate our aid programme is quite small and I do not propose at this stage to do more than remind the Minister of that. Our figure at less than. 2 per cent of GNP is very small by international standards. While I appreciate that internationally there has been a slowing down of such aid, I believe we should be doing much more.

The Estimates are in the course of preparation for 1981 and I strongly appeal to the Minister to resist any further pressures to reduce the development aid programme and ask him to ensure that last year's shortfall will be made up and that the appropriate further increase that would in normal times be made for 1981 will be added. This is my opportunity to appeal to the Minister to fight the corner for development aid and ensure that we can once again hold our heads reasonably high in the international field and point to a reasonable aid programme from Ireland to the developing world.

I want to go back to the main thrust of my contribution which to a large degree relates to our lack of knowledge of what is happening in the Third World, the difficulties that exist there and what we might do about them. Here the aid programme is generally administered by the Department of Foreign Affairs.

The Minister for Foreign Affairs has a very wide range of responsibilities from the point of view of the United Nations, the EEC and so on and can only devote a limited amount of time to overseeing our development aid programme and to contacts with the Third World. With the huge number of Ministers of State that we have at present — most people would consider that we have far too many and that most of them are half redundant anyway — now is the time to consider making one of such Ministers of State more gainfully employed. Therefore I would strongly advocate the appointment of one such Minister of State in the Department of Foreign Affairs who would have overall responsibility for our development aid programme and relations with the Third World. I believe such a step would be a progressive one and that such an appointment might be coupled with greater emphasis being placed on information here at home about the Third World. I would point out to the House that many other European countries have Ministers for International Co-operation who are concerned solely with development aid programmes and relations with the developing countries. I am not in any way suggesting that our present Minister be relieved entirely of responsibility in this matter. However I believe that, with a Minister of State involved and specifically in charge of such a programme, we would be able to make more progress and ensure that there is a heightened public awareness in this country of the need to expand our contacts with the Third World. With such appointment I think there would be a greater political will providing the necessary funds to play our part better and perform a greater role in helping the Third World.

On behalf of my party I should say that we support the motion before the House. The amounts of money involved are small but, of course, they are fixed by international quota on the basis of 0.16 per cent of the overall budget. I observe that there is provision for voluntary contributions to the organisation. I am not sure whether these are voluntary governmental contributions or whether they are related to a contribution by private individuals or organisations. Perhaps the Minister would clarify this point when replying.

Mr. Quinn

In considering a motion like this the House may well run the risk of missing what is really happening in the world at present. The agency to which this motion refers and which will be created when another 62 or 63 countries like ours ratify this agreement will have very little impact in terms of Third World industrialisation in comparison with the role that the multinational or trans-national corporations are having currently in the world of industrialisation. I was surprised and somewhat disappointed that the Minister did not refer to the major force for industrialisation in the world today, which is undoubtedly the collective activities of what are now called the trans-national or multinational corporations. Until such time as the international community at United Nations level, within the EEC and even within the context of UNCTAD, begins to look seriously at the operations of these corporations the real benefits of industrialisation, which are undoubtedly required, will be ceded not to the people who produce the wealth in various countries but rather back to the corporate headquarters, which are usually registered in some multiplicity of tax havens such as Liechtenstein or the Cayman Islands with their official headquarters in London, New York or Paris.

This House in agreeing to this motion in effect will be agreeing to commit this country to paying a certain amount of money albeit a miniscule amount relative to the total cost, less than 1 per cent, to support an agency which will be facilitating the industrialisation of Third World countries, and there is here a certain emphasis on Africa. The concern of my party is that taxpayers' money could and may very well be used to the ultimate benefit of private multinational companies or anonymously owned multinational companies.

I believe there is a problem related to the whole question of the establishment of a new economic order on the international stage if certain rights and obligations do not travel with it. For example, I do not see any benefit to the community at large, or to individual countries, if as a result of increased working standards of safety and decent wages being paid in a country such as Italy, the Fiat Corporation and Volkswagen Corporation transfer their vehicle manufacturing plants from that country to Brazil where trade unions are suppressed, where basic human rights are constantly repressed by the military regime. In what was otherwise a very comprehensive speech introducing this motion — which merely asks us to ratify the establishment of this separate agency I am sorry the Minister did not refer to that aspect of the whole process of industrialisation. The major problem facing the economic international community in attempting to achieve the new international economic order to which President Boumedienne first gave voice at the United Nations Assembly in 1967, particularly in the western world, is undoubtedly the massive collective power of the multinational corporations. Many of these corporations have budgets way in excess of medium to small-sized countries. Their economic leverage, their access to know-how, their manipulation of technology their ability to fund and research educational institutions in the developed world for their exclusive benefit, and indeed their ability to buy or topple Third World countries — which has been all to well documented — is awesome. The democratic international community is fooling itself if it does not recognise that this is a new major economic international force that must be contained within the context of international laws. The tragedy for this country is that neither within the context of the Nine, soon to become the Ten Members of the EEC, nor within the context of UNCTAD and the United Nations generally, have we begun sufficiently to recognise this. In part we have a conflict of interest. On the one hand we have an agency, the Industrial Development Authority, successfully selling the attractiveness of Ireland to the international corporations. Today's newspaper headlines announce 40,000 job approvals for that agency.

If every country in the world starts to bid for the favours of these international corporations with tax concessions and grants, the net effect will be that the offers will be increased, the public tax benefits will be enlarged and the people who will ultimately benefit will be the international corporations themselves. In Belfast we have had the spectacle of the Delorean car project, a most extreme example of the way in which depressed areas in the world, desperate for jobs because of the failure of the economic system, bid for or attempt to bribe industrialists to come in to produce the magic jobs at enormous price.

I hope that the Minister's interest in development co-operation will be allowed to mature and develop and that we will not see him here after Christmas with another portfolio. I hope that in participating in the work of UNIDO, which will now become a separate agency, the aspect of industrialisation I have been talking about on a global scale will be looked at, because it seems to be quite pointless to promote and develop, either on a multilateral or bilateral way, industrial development in certain countries if as a result of that those countries get locked into the machinations and the market framework of international corporations. Specifically, we will not achieve the objectives, particularly in the western world, of shifting the balance of industrialisation on equitable terms from the 7 per cent to which Deputy O'Keeffe referred to the target figure of 25 per cent of industrial produce in the world by the end of this century if the problem of the multinational corporations is not properly recognised internationally at political level and then dealt with.

We have this problem domestically in the oil situation. The corporation tax contribution of "the seven sisters", the big oil companies, to the Irish Exchequer is a scandal and anyone who knows anything about the taxation system knows it. The oil companies can do it because of manipulation: their buying price in one country and their selling price in another, their paper transfers around the globe, registering particular trading companies, a multiplicity of holding companies. With professional tax advisers they can minimise their net contribution to the world and at the same time get from the world and from organisations like UNIDO tax supports and indeed cash.

An Ceann Comhairle

I suggest that the Deputy does not develop that point.

Mr. Quinn

I do not think we can take ourselves seriously as supporters of UNIDO unless we recognise these matters. It is the core of this problem. The motion before us is quite clear, we are in favour of it and we accept the role of UNIDO in providing a multinational framework of aid and basic advice for countries which need it. The actual contribution that we will have to make is very small and I hope the Minister will clarify what the relationship in fiscal terms will be of UNIDO, which will be directly funded by state levies, and the UNDP. The Minister made it clear that UNDP last year contributed about £51 million towards the £70 million estimated budget. The director general, Mr. Morse, was recently in Dublin and spoke of the financial difficulties of UNDP, and I am wondering how this restructuring will alleviate the problems of UNDP. I am aware of some of the positive work that organisation have done in the matter of providing advice on industrialisation to emerging countries.

There are only 18 states, excluding our own, who have ratified or are in the process of ratifying this resolution, and 62 others will be required before the 80-State quota will be achieved in order to establish UNIDO as an independent body. Perhaps the Minister will give some indication of the timetable within which UNIDO can become a separate agency.

Minister for Foreign Affairs (Mr. Lenihan)

The whole purpose of the measure before the House is to ensure that UNIDO can operate as an autonomous agency in an effective manner. Heretofore it did not have the degree of independence and permanence now being guaranteed by a new constitution. Effectively, the cost of expert advice, equipment and the forms of technical co-operation to which I have referred, are met by UNDP, and UNIDO is the executing agency of UNDP.

Primarily, the financing comes by way of contributions from member countries, but Deputy O'Keeffe referred to financing on a voluntary basis. Special UNIDO projects are financed out of a fund, established by UNDP in 1976, with a funding level of 50 million dollars annually. Voluntary contributions to the fund began at about one-fifth of the target but they are rising, providing more resources than previous voluntary funds. In addition to contributions from member countries there is this special voluntary fund, and receipts into that fund are rising steadily. Special efforts are being made to provide a separate special funding mechanism as well. However, the primary financing is still by way of direct contributions from states.

Deputy Quinn devoted some time to multinationals. I will not engage in an argument about the desirability or otherwise of international corporations. However, they are a fact of life, part of the economic development of mankind. They make a contribution by way of development and employment. Much of the advance research and development work essential to industry in the future is carried out and paid for by multinational companies. So there is a positive side——

Mr. Quinn

I do not doubt it, but that is all the more reason to regulate them.

Mr. Lenihan

I appreciate the obvious dangers in excessive power structures of that kind, and within the UN there is a strong awareness of this and negotiations are being undertaken on a code of conduct for multinationals. We hope to see that code emerging very shortly. We expect to see a conclusion in the matter next year. We hope before the end of 1981 we will have established an international code of conduct applicable to multinational companies. That is the sensible approach: to acknowledge that there is a certain economic dynamism that makes the existence of multinational companies part of the modern, international economic order but that in the greater interest there should be a regulatory code of conduct which will apply to them and ensure that any excesses on their part are avoided. This international code of conduct will, we hope, emerge before the end of next year with a proper system of implementation as well.

I am glad of the welcome that has been given to this measure, which is part of the whole drive towards a new international order, which is now very much a major objective of UN policy. We had a special session of the UN some months ago on this whole area. Negotiations are proceeding towards the specific details of an international economic strategy. We have already referred in an earlier debate to the Brandt Report. It in popular form sets out the whole philosophy behind the essential need in the modern world to have an international global strategy towards the creation of an international economic order. It is for the benefit of the developed world as well as for the developing world that an interaction of interests in this area, both from the practical point of view and from the moral, idealistic point of view, makes good, practical, political and economic sense. From the social and ethical point of view it is also necessary. We cannot have growing disparities within our world. If we have them, we will see before the end of this century stagnation in the developed as well as the developing world, because there will not be any market for the technological products and expertise of the developed world. If the developing world is allowed to proceed into a situation of disaster, tension and conflict, the developed world will begin to stagnate.

There are from the overall political point of view many dangerous revolutionary strains inherent in the horrible prospect of one half of the world starving through inability to cope and the other half of it proceeding at a pace ahead of it. There is need for a coincidence of development and investment as well as a balanced and harmonised approach to world development. I believe that this will require an improvement of the mechanisms through which money and investment can be channelled towards the developing world.

One of the reasons for this motion is that we see in UNIDO an executive agency which will deal with the problem and will provide a proper basis for funding. I believe there will have to be similar reforms in relation to the World Bank and in regard to lending agencies generally. Private lending agencies will have to ensure a more appropriate recycling of funds, which is a major problem in the world at the moment, because of the oil revenues lying dormant in banks and institutions around the world which have not been spread out into investment. This is a big practical challenge facing the lending institutions — private, national and international — at the moment. We must secure a release of those funds for the required investment in the developing world.

I would like again to pay tribute to the Irish State agencies and Irish private interests who are playing a very practical role in parts of the world, particularly in Africa. As I mentioned in my opening speech, Bord na Móna have played a practical role in developing peat resources in Rwanda and Burundi. SFADCo have given advice to a number of countries around the world. The ESB have given their advice in relation to the construction of power stations and the distribution of electric power. Aer Lingus have also been involved with a number of developing countries. This is apart from the number of private agencies which are also involved.

There is one contribution which we can make above any other. We do not have funds to distribute on any large scale, but we have a considerable amount of expertise. Since the foundation of the State this expertise has contributed to the economic development of a state that has faced, over the past 50 years, precisely the same problems facing many of those emergent nations. There is a capacity here that does not exist in many other countries and particularly within the State agencies which have been associated with this development. Another one I want to name is the Agricultural Institute, which has done tremendous work in rural development. The capacity and skill we have utilised in building up from what we were, a developing nation, can be translated by us into effective action on the ground by way of advice and help to those developing countries. This can be given at their request. They are in a position to make an assessment about what projects we can help. We can give them that advice and help and, having built up the management and administration on the ground, we can take our departure.

That is precisely the way we have operated through those various agencies. Deputy O'Keeffe referred to this earlier in regard to the Italian disaster. One of the main difficulties one meets in developing countries is the absence of administration, management and the application of expertise and skills. This is an area where we can give very valuable advice and help. The most important aspect of all is that we are trusted by developing countries. They see in us a country that can give and which does not have any bad associations with the past. They realise that in dealing with us they are not dealing with people who are in there for any reasons other than to do the job as effectively as possible. That trust is a very important factor in the relationship which exists between Ireland and developing countries regarding projects of the kind I have described.

That is far more important than the amount of money we give. We can effectively bring about the type of relationship I am talking about. We are particularly suited for this by reason of our background. What we can offer to give is much more important than sums of money. Of course, money is important; but what I have just spoken about as our practical contribution on the ground is, I believe, far more important and far more enduring.

Question put and agreed to.