asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs whether the Government intends implementing the proposals and recommendations contained in the Brandt report in so far as they request action on the part of this country.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Brandt Report.
27.
The Brandt report, officially the Report of the Independent Commission on International Development Issues, published earlier this year, is a uniquely important contribution to the discussions and negotiations on international economic issues between the developed and developing countries, the so-called North-South dialogue, which has assumed major importance in the international agenda in recent years. The report looks at the main issues of the dialogue and makes numerous recommendations regarding steps that need to be taken to overcome the many economic difficulties that now confront developed and developing countries. As I said in a recent Seanad debate on the subject, the Brandt report is probably the most important document on North-South matters to appear in our time. I have no doubt that it will exercise a strong influence on future negotiations in the North-South dialogue.
Here at home, as elsewhere, it has attracted much attention. Its recommendations are many and not all of these, of course, apply to this country. It is much too early yet to say in what way precisely Ireland can contribute effectively to follow-up work on the report. Several of the recommendations relate, as the report acknowledges, to work that is now in progress. It is, however, clear that new initiatives and new approaches are needed. We will play our part, individually and as a member state of the European Community, to try to ensure that the decade of the eighties will see a progressive involvement of the developing countries in the running of the global economy at all levels. Bilaterally, we will continue to strengthen our co-operation with a number of the poorer developing countries; and we will move, as rapidly as our resources allow, towards the UN target of 0.7 per cent of GNP for Official Development Assistance (ODA). What we can do as a small country is obviously limited by our resources and our circumstances, but we have built up a good track record in recent years and we will not be found wanting in our overall response to the Brandt report in the years to come.
A back track record.
I am glad of the enthusiastic welcome that the Minister obviously is giving to the very important Brandt Report. Everybody knows the fate of reports all through the centuries. Are the Government prepared to make any special arrangements to the extent that the recommendations referring to our country are dealt with as expeditiously as possible? Is there any likelihood of a Government sub-committee being established to see that the matter is dealt with rather than simply pitched here, as happens with reports under all Governments? It is particularly important, as the Minister has said.
As far as the Brandt report is concerned, there is no question about its importance and I am, as the Deputy suggests, having it examined in my Department in regard to ways that we as a nation can help in the follow-up. We are playing our part already in the Community. We are concerned with the main theme of the Brandt report, which is the impact of our strategy in the new international world order. In effect this means the organisation of the finance mechanism generally, both public and private, in the developed world to ensure a massive transfer of funds to the developing world. This is one of the accidents of history. Unfortunately, side by side with the report there was the very serious situation caused by the hiking up of oil prices which does not make for the Government having the budgetary freedom to do what they would like to do in many ways.
Do I take it from the Minister's reply that he accepts one of the major recommendations of the report under the emergency section, that all countries should aim for the 0.7 per cent of ODA by 1985?
We have accepted it and it has been agreed in the past. The resolution adopted in the UN Special Session stated that in the eighties all developed countries would make a special effort to achieve the 0.7 per cent target. We were one of the countries who supported the progressive resolution in that respect. Some of the very large and wealthy countries did not support it.
I am confused by the terminology.
It is in the resolution. It is not mine.
It is not promising it any.
The Government must go to a specific target of 0.7 per cent by 1985. Is this target accepted by our Government?
When the resolution was adopted eventually that phraseology was agreed. As Deputy FitzGerald is aware, this type of phraseology creeps into European resolutions in order to get them passed and any other wording would not have been passed.
The Minister is being asked a question about this Government. Do this Government accept and commit themselves to implement this recommendation here in this House?
We have agreed to a part in the adoption of the European resolution into which a best efforts clause is written.
(Interruptions.)
Is the answer "yes" or "no"?
The Deputy has been told that we took our place with other United Nations countries of the developed world in passing a resolution and that the wording of the resolution was designed so as to get through the United Nations.
Are this Government committed—
I have answered the question. That is all.
The Minister is not prepared to give an honest answer.