Internal Fund for Ireland: Motion.

Minister for Foreign Affairs (Mr. P. Barry)

I move:

That Dáil Éireann hereby approves the terms of the Agreement between the Government of Ireland and the Government of the United Kingdom concerning the International Fund for Ireland, which was signed on 18 September, 1986, and copies of which have been laid before Dáil Éireann on 20 October, 1986.

On 15 November last year, the Taoiseach signed on behalf of the Government the Anglo-Irish Agreement at Hillsborough. The agreement to establish the International Fund for Ireland, whose terms I am asking the Dáil to approve, springs directly from the Anglo-Irish Agreement of last year.

Article 10 of the Anglo-Irish Agreement sets out the commitment of the two Governments to co-operate to promote the economic and social development of those areas of both parts of Ireland which have suffered most severely from the consequences of the instability of recent years. In the period since the coming into effect of the Anglo-Irish Agreement, the Irish and British Governments have worked closely together to secure international support for this purpose. Already generous support has been given or pledged and the International Fund for Ireland is being set up to manage those contributions.

The agreement to establish the fund, the text of which is before the House, is a further instrument of co-operation between the Irish and British Governments which will bring practical benefits to the two parts of Ireland. The creation of the fund responds to the interest expressed by the Governments of many foreign countries not only to see the aims of the Ango-Irish Agreement succeed but to support these aims by offering financial and other practical assistance for the economic and social development of this country — North and South. The fund provides a channel for expressing international political support in a practical way. In the words of the preamble to the agreement, the fund provides an important expression of international support for the common commitment of the two Governments to peace, stability, dialogue and reconciliation in Ireland and their common opposition to the exploitation of instability for political ends.

The establishment of the International Fund for Ireland is yet another example of the steady implementation of the objectives outlined in the Anglo-Irish Agreement. It is an example of the beneficial effect of the agreement for Nationalists and Unionists alike. In Northern Ireland, where serious under-employment and multiple deprivation create a climate in which instability can flourish, the international fund will bring real benefits by increasing the resources available to tackle these problems. It will also stimulate international interest among potential investors from abroad, especially from the contributing countries. The fund is yet another example of practical co-operation between North and South for sound economic and social ends.

This new agreement will set up the international fund with the objectives of promoting "economic and social advance" and of encouraging "contact, dialogue and reconciliation between Nationalists and Unionists throughout Ireland".

The fund will be established as an international organisation of which the Irish and British Governments are the members. It will be administered by a board consisting of a chairman and six other members, appointed jointly by both Governments. The membership of the board has already been announced. The members who have agreed to serve all have a distinguished record in business and public life. I am confident that by bringing the wealth of their experience to the fund, they will ensure that it stimulates economic development in both parts of Ireland in a significant and imaginative way. To encourage this and to foster initiative and innovation, the board will be given a free hand. As article 6 of the agreement states:

... The Board shall act independently and shall not receive instructions from Governments as to the exercise of their powers.

Donor countries may send observers to participate in board meetings and the United States and Canada have indicated that they intend to exercise this right. The observers will put forward the views of the donors on the operation and development of the International Fund, but I hope that they will also be a valuable link to the business and investment communities in the donor countries.

The board of the fund will be assisted by an advisory committee composed of representatives of both the Irish and British Governments. Through the advisory committee the two Governments will make known to the board of the fund their views on the policies and programmes the fund may adopt and the projects it will finance. Government Departments, North and South, will assist the board in assessing and evaluating projects and these assessments will be channelled to the board through the advisory committee. However, I must stress that the role of the advisory committee will be an advisory one. It will be for the board members to make up their own minds and decide.

The agreement provides that approximately three-quarters of the resources of the fund will be spent in Northern Ireland with the remainder expended here. In its operation in this jurisdiction, I expect that the fund will give particular consideration to the Border areas. I do not have to spell out the special problems which these areas have experienced or the need for special efforts to promote investment opportunities and tourism revenue. Outside these areas, projects of an all-Ireland nature which fulfil the objectives and satisfy the criteria of the fund may also be considered for assistance by the board of the fund.

The priority areas for investment by the fund are set out in article 4 of the agreement which provides that the fund should give priority on a value for money basis to the following: (a) the stimulation of private sector investment, in particular by means of venture capital arrangements; (b) projects of benefit to people in both parts of Ireland; (c) projects to improve the quality and conditions of life for people in areas facing serious economic and/or social problems and (d) projects to provide wider horizons for people from both traditions in Ireland.

In deciding what emphasis the fund should give to particular priority areas, the board will observe the agreement, will receive advice from the two Governments and will also take into account the preferences and requirements of the donors where these have been expressed. For example, Canada wishes its cash contribution to be used partly to fund exchanges between the young people of Ireland, North and South, and of Canada. The US Congress and Administration have stressed the desirability of assessing private business enterprise.

As soon as possible after the fund is established, once it has had a chance to begin its work, it would be normal for the board to advertise and to invite applications. Such an advertisement could spell out the priority areas which the board intends to emphasise and could publish the criteria against which projects will be measured. At an early date, my Department will ask the board to consider the applications which have been received by various Government Departments since the announcement of the fund was made. The large number of these applications reflects the interest in both communities and in both parts of Ireland in advancing co-operation and economic development.

Another important aspect of the international fund will be the establishment of two investment companies, one in each part of Ireland, with similar objectives and common directors, whose functions will be to furnish venture capital for the private sector. The role of these companies will be to stimulate viable and self-sustaining growth in the private sector of both parts of Ireland. I expect them to give a boost to industrial development in Northern Ireland and in the Border areas and to increase the rate of business start-up and expansion there.

Article 10 of the agreement provides that the accommodation and secretarial services necessary for the proper functioning of the fund together with its general administrative and organisational expenses shall be provided jointly by the two Governments. These secretarial services will be provided by my Department and by the Department of Finance and Personnel in Stormont. The Irish Government's share of the administrative costs of the fund, which are expected to be modest, will be provided by way of a grant from subhead I — Anglo-Irish and North-South Co-operation — of the Vote of my Department.

The motion before us today would not have been possible without the generous contributions already announced by the United States, Canada and New Zealand Governments. I wish to repeat here the Government's deep appreciation of this generosity. The United States Government have already made a contribution of £50 million to the international fund and has concluded a technical agreement which provides for the US donation to be held in trust, pending the completion of the Irish and British parliamentary procedures and the establishment of the fund. A copy of this technical agreement, which came into force on signature, was laid before both Houses of the Oireachtas on 20 October. The US has authorised two further contributions each of £35 million for the fiscal years 1987 and 1988.

Canada has decided on a contribution of Canadian £10 million over ten years, half in cash and half in loan guarantees. New Zealand will make a grant of N.Z. £300,000 to the fund. I expect that the arrangements for these contributions will be finalised early in 1987. Discussions are continuing between the Irish and British Governments on the possibility of a European contribution involving the European Communities and other western European countries.

In respect of the agreement before us today, Dáil approval is being sought in accordance with Article 29.5.2 of the Constitution. After such approval the Government will exchange acceptances of the agreement with the British Government. The Government will also make an order under Section 40 of the Diplomatic Relations and Immunities Act, 1967, for the purposes of:

giving effect to article 5 of the agreement to establish the fund;

giving it the status of a body corporate in Irish law; and exempting it from the payment of direct taxes.

In accordance with the Act, the Order will be laid before both Houses of the Oireachtas. The parliamentary procedures in Britain were completed last week and, if the Dáil approves this motion, the two Governments should have the fund legally established by the end of the month.

In the Anglo-Irish Agreement, the British and Irish Governments committed themselves, inter alia, to co-operate to promote the economic and social development of both parts of Ireland. The Intergovernmental Conference has been working steadily to achieve this aim. The agreement which we are discussing today is yet another practical demonstration of the co-operation between the two Governments in their determination to tackle the economic causes of instability in Ireland. The welcome which the International Fund for Ireland has received underlines the international support for our efforts. I am convinced that the fund will make a real contribution to economic and social advance and to the process of reconciling the two communities in Ireland. I commend the motion to the House.

Mr. G. Collins

We welcome in principle the setting up of the International Fund for Ireland as an indication of international interest, especially North American interest, in a solution to the Northern Ireland problem. We see it as worthwhile. It is a useful gesture for which we are grateful to the Governments and people concerned, the Government and people of the United States, Canada and New Zealand. While the funding is more limited than what was originally hoped, it is still significant and can only be very beneficial. At the time of the New Ireland Forum there was criticism in many quarters of the notion that any other country or Government would be willing to underpin financially, for a temporaty period at least, a political solution to the problem of Northern Ireland. Some of the economic studies of the Forum looked at a scenario where there would be no outside assistance at all. We always maintained that there would be money available over a transitional period to support a solution likely to bring lasting peace and stability to Ireland. The financial assistance we are discussing today bears out that point of view.

One of the implications of the assistance is that the United States Congress now has a direct interest in the problem of Northern Ireland. It will wish to see that the funds are administered fairly and that they tackle areas of greatest need. The fund will also make a significant and valuable contribution, as has the non-quota section of the Regional Fund, to cross-Border projects. The Border areas have suffered particularly severely not only from the current troubles but from the original decision to partition Ireland thus in many cases cutting off towns and cities from part of their natural hinterlands.

Some of the worst unemployment levels in Europe are found in northern Border towns. We agree with the priorities of the fund, to stimulate private investment, to promote cross-Border co-operation and to tackle the conditions of life for people in areas facing economic and social problems, especially high unemployment, poor social services, infrastructure and environment and the provision of wider opportunities for people from different traditions. We see in this fund a basis for support of future political developments and structures designed to solve the Northern Ireland problem. A welcome for the fund has never been a point of contention between the parties. Any points we would have to make about the question of the Anglo-Irish Agreement we would make in a separate context.

Having listened carefully to what the Minister said I would like to bring one sentence in particular to the Minister's intention. He stated:

Discussions are continuing between the Irish and British Governments on the possibility of a European contribution involving the European Communities and other Western countries.

The Minister must know there is a certain disappointment that progress has not been made in this area. Perhaps when he has an opportunity to reply he will spell out in detail the reasons progress has not been made between the Irish and British Governments on this matter.

Mr. Harte

I welcome this with reservations. I take the view that this is part of the Anglo-Irish Agreement and that the money that has been generously sent by the American, Canadian and New Zealand Governments is a contribution on their part towards peace and normality on this island which has made a very significant contribution to the development of their nations down through history. I am not at all convinced that the money which is available will make any major contribution to what these three nations indicate they would like it to do. The most significant part of the Minister's speech was when he stated that in the Anglo-Irish Agreement the British and Irish Governments committed themselves, inter alia, to co-operate to promote the economic and social development of both parts of Ireland. After 25 years in public life, I am convinced that not only is it not consistent but it is downright dangerous to be talking about the unity of the Irish nation, North and South, both in terms of people and in geographical terms, without looking at the economic unity of the country first. No part of Ireland has lost more through partition — I am not talking about partition per se— than the county of which I am a native. We are seen as not being part of the South. We are northern in our attitudes and in our general ethos. We are northern in the broadest possible definition. We are not considered by the Government, whether the present Government or any other Government, as being southern. It is sad to relate this and I say it as constructive criticism.

My supporters in County Donegal will wonder why 25 per cent of this money is being spent in the most deprived part of Ireland and 75 per cent is going across the Border. Deputies from the constituency will bear out that businesses are struggling to exist on this side of the Border. Filling stations have closed down. Last week I saw a bulldozer in Lifford bulldozing a filling station. It is now an obstruction to the local garage. There is only one filling station between the Border and where I live. If that closes I will have to go to Letterkenny or into Northern Ireland to buy fuel for my car. I know this Government — I do not say this with any sense of pride or for political pointscoring — had an awful job to do when they took over the economy of this country. I support the direction which they are pursuing. It is the only sane way to correct the economy. Those who are paying most of this are people in Border areas.

While we can talk about the unity of the Irish people politically, we have forgotten that it is not possible; it is putting the cart before the horse; it is codology; it is cloud cuckooland if we do not unite the economies of the country. I am glad the Minister referred to the Anglo-Irish Agreement. That is the most significant part of his speech. The fact that we have got money from friendly nations gives a sense of satisfaction to all of us and we are very grateful to the countries which have subscribed. The members of those national Parliaments gave that money out of the goodness of their hearts, a deep generosity and a wish on their part that normality, peace and everything that goes with it should be restored to Ireland.

However, the onus lies on the Government here, whether it be of a coalition arrangement or a one party Government under Fianna Fáil, to recognise the central issue of the entire question in relation to North-South politics, and the communities who divide into things called Nationalism and Unionism. At the end of the day it is economics we are talking about. How many times have we as public representatives gone to the North to be told by people from traditions which do not subscribe to our ethos or are from a different political background, "When you can guarantee us a better standard of living. When our children are assured of a better income, when we can live in a house as good as we are living in at a cheaper rent or a better house at the same rent, do not talk to us about Irish unity because you will have nothing to offer us"?

Having studied history, I am satisfied that the reason Northern Protestant people did not give their consent to a separate state of Ireland free of being governed by Westminster was that they put a value on their customers in Scotland, England and Wales, because they put an economic value on being governed by Westminister even though they did not want to be governed by English people sitting in a British Parliament. To this very day that debate is going on. Only last week the Unionist Party were afraid to allow the press in to discuss this central issue. Irish people, regardless of whether they come from the Protestant or the Catholic tradition, are what we are talking about at the end of the day. The flags representing unionism, nationalism, republicanism and loyalism are conveniences for people who have not the courage to call themselves bigots. I am sorry to say that, but that is my firm conviction at this time.

It would be far easier to call ourselves Irish and let us practise our religions in whatever way we want to practise them. Until the Northern issue is settled, decade after decade, generation after generation, the things that happened in the past 20 years will be repeated. If there is one thing that history tells us it is that as we become more sophisticated in the devices we use to murder and maim one another we can do this in more horrendous ways. That is one thing that history is telling us loud and clear. This generation must find answers to the problem of the people who live on this island, some of whom choose to put tags on themselves declaring. "I am a true republican, super Irish," or "I am a true blue, super British". I have no time for super anything. At the end of the day we are Irish and we should settle for that and share pride in calling ourselves that.

In welcoming the Minister's statement and in congratulating him on the record that is there to be examined, nevertheless I have to say that the amounts of money which are being presented as being a contribution towards a development of relationships between Nationalist and Unionist will be no contribution really. If I were to go along with that thinking I would be dishonest with the House and with myself. Catholic people living north of the Border have for two generations enjoyed the advanced economic background and standard of living there and they have not become anything other than Catholic-Nationalist-Republican. If they were to have better conditions they still would not change, and neither would the Unionist-Loyalist. That ethos of Northern Ireland people who have not given their consent to join in an all-Ireland settlement will never change their way of thinking just because money is put in front of them. The only way it can be got is by both Governments recognising that partition has been an economic injustice to people living on both sides of the Border and that the closer you get to it the greater the injustice. I see that as so glaring that I despair not alone of the party that I belong to and the Government I support but in the whole attitude of this House in trying to find a solution. Recently I said in a speech that I was not satisfied that Irish nationalism was led in the last 150 or 200 years by people living in the city of Dublin or south of it, good intelligent, honest, sincere people with a dynamic desire to try to do good, but who were incapable of understanding the minds of the northern person. They were unable to understand the northern ethos. Here I was, blaming the politicians when I delivered the speeches. Now I have come to the conclusion that the journalists who write the politics of Ireland are also incapable of understanding and I have discovered suddenly that if I want to communicate with a journalist in Dublin about the north I have to talk to a northern journalist living in Dublin or a journalist in the North. There is a sympathetic hearing from Southern journalists and they agree completely with the things one is saying — it all makes sense — but at the end of the day they are not really switched on.

We have a mammoth task which lies fairly and squarely with Westminster and Dublin. Quite apart from the Government in power, I am not and never was interested in the party politics of the Northern troubles since they started. Neither was I ever interested in being a bitter politician because the stakes are far too big for play-acting. I speak here as representing ordinary people in Donegal and I have no doubt that when Deputy Conaghan speaks for the Fianna Fáil Party he will confirm the economic stress in Border areas at the moment particularly in east Donegal. I had sad experiences during the summer of discovering that in towns like Buncrana and Moville, holiday resorts, and in the smaller areas neighbouring those towns there just were no visitors and continually we hear complaints from people in family businesses, small grocers, people running small corner shops and street traders, that they are just hanging on because of the policy of this Government who are in a "catch 22" position of either facing up to the economic realities or letting us jog on to a crash at the bottom of the hill.

With regard to cross-Border co-operation, only in the last couple of weeks An Post announced that they were delivering here in the Republic more letters posted from Great Britain and Northern Ireland than the British authorities were delivering for us, so An Post tell us that they are going to charge us extra for this. All of us hear Dr. Ian Paisley stand up and talk about "that foreign State down there and those foreigners from the Republic." Nobody believes him. Certainly I do not. The people of Strabane in County Tyrone and those of Lifford in County Donegal are the same community. I grew up in that community. The people of Derry city and County Derry, particularly those close to the border with Donegal, are the same people as the Donegal people. The people of south Down are the same as those of north Louth; the people of north Monaghan are the same as those of south Armagh.

When we hear people like Ian Paisley saying "that is a foreign country down there" nobody believes it. We say he is playing to the gallery but let us stop to think for a second. Who has made it a foreign country? An Post have now helped to make it a foreign country because if one wants to post a letter to the North there is an international charge. If somebody in the North wants to post a letter to the Republic they have to put a price on it the same as any other country in the EC. We are internationalising the Border between North and South. Eight or nine years ago when I kicked up a ferocious row about breaking with sterling, everybody was talking about the economics of it. I made the case that if we broke with sterling we would make sterling a foreign currency in the Republic and, conversely, we would make Irish money a foreign currency in the Six Counties. Irish money would be foreign currency in part of Ireland. We have internationalised the Border. We have created a Border far stronger than the Unionists could ever dream of.

I make this very passionate plea to the House to get our act together for the sake of people who live in Border areas. I welcome with open arms the generosity and goodwill in abundance of the United States of America, Canada and New Zealand. But why should they not be generous? If they go back far enough they will find their roots in this country but while acknowledging that point, there is a wealth of generosity among the peoples who live there. I participated in a survey which was carried out in the United States of America by Merseyhurst College in Erie in Pennsylvania who did it free gratis. They believed their roots took them back to Ireland and they wanted to make a contribution. Out of 2.1 million names, 10,000 names were scientifically selected and scientifically further refined down to 2,000 names. Then 2,000 letters went out to people with a questionnaire that the college authorities had come to Ireland to, as they said, get the bugs washed out of it, to discover whether this thing called goodwill could be translated into tangible economic support for the island of Ireland. They put in a battery of telephones and for five days they made over 1,200 positive telephone calls, some repeated two, three and four times, and that survey tells us that there is no preference in the United States as to where in Ireland money subscribed should be spent. They do not see Ireland as North and South. They do not see it as green and orange. As a matter of fact, many of them do not know where Belfast or Cork is, and most of them do not give a damn; they just want to help Ireland.

I am surprised there has been an agreement that 75 per cent of the money given by these countries will be spent on the side of the Border which I have to admit is more economically developed than the side on which I live and which I represent. It is unfair that 75 per cent of the money should be spent on one side of the Border and 25 per cent spent on what I would describe as the economically deprived part of Ireland. I say that because the people who give the money, the taxpayers in the United States of America, showed no preference according to the Merseyhurst survey. They would say they wanted to give the money to Ireland so that she can find her own economic level and so that the people of Ireland, in a period of prosperity, peace and normality will then find a political coming together. That is what the Merseyhurst survey tells us, loudly and clearly.

Incidentally, it is the only such survey ever conducted in the United States of America. It is most incredible that a small nation like ours, with so many ties with the United States of America which we almost consider to be part of the same family, has never, since the foundation of the State, tried to penetrate the thinking behind the goodwill of that ethnic group, the Irish Americans. The Merseyhurst survey is the first and — this is the first time I have had the opportunity to say this in Parliament — it is a credit to the college. They would tell us that they are no different from the other colleges with the same ethos. There are about 70 of them and any one of the 70 would have done what they did. They do not want any particular credit or thanks but, as a matter of record, I know that it cost $78,000 and they paid it willingly and were glad to be asked to do it.

I use this occasion to draw attention to the fact that parties who preach anti-partitionist politics cannot follow independent economic politics. Any party who support a Government that does anything which interferes with the normal trading relationship between people on both sides of the Border are not truly anti-partitionist and have not really got their economic politics correct. As someone with 25 years experience in public life who has identified myself with the troubles in the North and has been fortunate enough to meet people who have broadened my view and made me think the thing out a little bit further, I believe that one cannot talk about the unity of the Irish people in advance of having economic unity in both parts of Ireland. I believe the British people, the English particularly, would quietly admit to themselves in the comfort of their own homes that that nation and that Parliament, because of a history that they are not very proud of, would be quite willing to make a major contribution if their Government would go in that direction.

In conclusion let me say that the most relevant part of the Minister's speech is the part I have already quoted, that the British and Irish Governments commit themselves, inter alia, to co-operation and promoting the economic and social development of both parts of Ireland. That must be the direction. There is no other way. Whenever we can unite the economics of North and South we will be well on the way to achieving peace and normality on this island. When we achieve that, the political differences which separate us from the people of that other ethos who have not yet given their consent to be part of an all-Ireland nation will be resolved, but not until then.

Mr. J. Leonard

I too am pleased with the setting up of this International Fund for Ireland. It is not the be all and the end all of the Border problems, but anything that improves the economic structure of that area must be welcomed. The fund might not be as high as we wished and we might not like the divide — 75 per cent to the North and 25 per cent to the South — but nevertheless it is to be welcomed. I have been involved in cross-Border economic development over the last ten years and have always advocated the building of economic bridges. This was done very effectively in Monaghan, Fermanagh and Armagh.

A number of reports of the economic structure of the cross-Border areas have been issued over the past number of years and these can be used as a basis when it comes to distributing funds — the Erne catchment study report, the reports of the regional development organisations along the Border and, most important, the Irish Border Areas report issued by the Economic and Social Committee of the European Communities. Admittedly, we did not benefit as much from that report as we expected, but it was recognised that that area was severely handicapped. The introduction to the Irish Border Areas report, 1983, reads:

This report is concerned with an area of 20-30 miles on both sides of the frontier, encompassing the district council areas of London Derry, Strabane, Omagh, Femanagh, Dungannon, Armagh and Newry/Mourne (N. Ireland) and the counties of Donegal, Leitrim, Cavan, Monaghan and Louth (Republic).

The area covers 1,697,000 hectares spanning a 343 km land frontier and has a population of 747,000 (54% in Northern Ireland and 46% in the Republic).

Statistics indicate that the area is particularly handicapped and has a special claim on Community assistance. Farming is the lynchpin of the economy — particularly in the South — and there is relatively little industrial employment. Very low incomes, acute unemployment, outward migration and in some parts, falling population, are further features. Small farms, poor soil, population structure and inheritence and marriage patterns combine to impede the introduction of modern farming methods.

At present, cooperatives, tourism and small business appear to hold out the best hopes for development.

The emphasis must be laid on funding for those areas which have been clearly identified. The report continues:

In many parts, road infrastructure, domestic water supply networks and drainage systems are clearly inadequate and those which do exist are sometimes disrupted by troubles in the area.

In his speech the Minister said:

The Board shall act independently and shall not receive instructions from Governments as to the exercise of their powers.

I am very pleased about this because I feared there would be a tug-o'-war for the funds and that maybe the weaker areas would not get their proper share. That concern was fuelled further by statements made recently by the Taoiseach when, in response to pressure from a particular Deputy, he promised £10 million for County Louth. Over the past few weeks several agencies have made a case to siphon the money from the Border areas into the midlands. The Minister went on to say:

The priority areas of investment by the fund are set out in article 4 of the agreement which provides that the fund should give priority on a value of money basis to the following (a) the stimulation of private sector investment, particularly by means of venture capital arrangements; (b) projects of benefit to people in both parts of Ireland; (c) projects to improve the quality and conditions of life for people in areas facing serious economic and/or social problems; (d) projects to provide wider horizons for people from both traditions in Ireland.

Those four points sum up the problems of the area. The Minister also said:

I hope the functions of the advisory committee will be simply advisory. I also hope that elected representatives in the Border areas will get an opportunity to discuss all the projects which have been examined locally and that they will be able to make an input. This could be very useful. The Minister went on to say that two investment companies would be set up one on each side of the Border, with similar objectives and he spoke about self-sustaining growth. This will provide a great opportunity to investigate the economic structure of the area.

Over the last number of years the area South of the Border has been devastated and the economy has been wrecked because of the flow of trade into Northern Ireland. Many people believed that that flow northwards had tapered off, but that is not so. Last Saturday I was talking to a number of business people in Monaghan town where I hold a weekly clinic and more concern was expressed about cross-Border business than I had heard at any other time. People there said there was an intensification in the number of those shopping across the Border. This is a cause of grave concern. I hope wrongs will be righted when the Minister for Finance introduces his budget, because there is almost a complete closedown along the southern side of the Border of small filling stations and other outlets, especially those selling electrical equipment. I hope all this will be taken into account when we are dispensing this fund. We had hoped for a higher amount and for a different division of funds, although I would not deny the people in the Six Counties.

It has been said that the northern economy is stronger than ours but that is questionable. In the North something like $120 million was allocated for 1977-1978 and something in the region of $25 million would have been available to the five southern counties. Newpaper reports over the past few weeks have indicated that there are pressures to drag this international fund east and west. Because of that fear I contacted public representatives of all political persuasions in Cavan, Leitrim and Monaghan and suggested that we get together to make sure we get a fair cut of the cake. We worked on that committee in conjunction with our northern counterparts. Much valuable work was done in identifying areas of need and pinpointing where money should be spent.

We had the Border Counties Fund from 1982 to 1985. That fund contained something in the region of £20 million to stimulate tourism and to fund roads infrastructure and so on. A total of £17.8 million was spent on the five Border counties and £2.152 million went to Bord Fáilte and CTT promotions. I objected to that because £½ million went to CTT to promote crafts in an area that does not produce crafts. Within a fraction of 50 per cent of the £17.8 million went to one county and the other four counties got varying amounts from 10 per cent to 14 per cent of the fund. That was our experience of that fund and that is the fund to which we would look to see how this fund will be administered. Considering that fund gives us our reason for trying to ensure that on this occasion there will be a more even-handed distribution of the fund.

At those cross-Border meetings we talked in terms of opening Border roads. I said consistently that we should have all the lines of communication open. The closure of Border crossings has been a drawback to the economy of the Border regions. I hope this committee in their deliberations will examine not alone existing cross-Border roads, but roads which have been closed for a number of years. The closure of some of the cross-Border roads has caused problems to farmers and businessmen. Farmers with land on both sides of the Border have had to travel ten or 12 miles to move stock and produce from their land as a result of the closure of some roads. The committee should consider opening some of the roads and should reconsider the access roads to the Border. The access roads are bottlenecked because there are so few of them. We should do everything possible to open the roads and all lines of communication.

This report makes positive proposals relating to tourism and agriculture. It proposes to research agriculture along the Border. The report also covers roads, telecommunications, energy, industry, tourism, drainage, forestry and agricultural training. This report itemizes each county or region, outlines the drawbacks and proposes remedies. The problems on each side of the Border are common so there should be no problem in coming together and coming up with projects which would benefit both sides of the Border.

In these areas there are small industries only. Monaghan has a fair number of small industries, mostly agriculture based, based on poultry, pigs, beef, etc. There are other industries on the other side of the Border. There is a great opportunity for further development in this area. The same applies to afforestation where there is room for further processing.

There is also great potential for tourism because of the lakeland district of Enniskillen and the lakes of Cavan-Monaghan. We should exploit the Erne catchment area. The proposals for the Ballymore-Ballyconnell canal linking it to the Shannon make it one of the finest waterways in Europe. The money we received from the last Border fund did not go to the areas which deserved it most and I hope the same will not apply to this fund.

I wish the proposal well and I hope that the points we made will be taken into consideration when the committee are disbursing the funds.

Deputy Conaghan rose.

Mr. O'Malley

I have offered on a number of occasions but you are now allowing two Deputies from the same party to speak in succession.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Nobody offered on the Government side and as only two speakers had contributed from the main Opposition Party I am calling Deputy Conaghan.

Mr. O'Malley

I do not wish to quibble with your rulings but it makes it extremely difficult——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy should resume his seat. He will be called if possible. I explained the position and I thought it was clear.

Mr. O'Malley

I am not quibbling with Deputy Conaghan's right to speak——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

You are quibbling with the Chair.

Mr. O'Malley

It is virtually impossible for someone who is not a member of a major party to speak.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

This is a limited debate and you are wasting time.

Mr. Conaghan

I welcome the fund and hope that by its very nature it will lead to the resolution of the problems confronting people who live on both sides of the Border. The most significant aspect of the gesture is that it has been recognised at international level that there is a problem in relation to the Border areas and that the violence in Northern Ireland over the last 13 years has been caused by chronic unemployment and the nature of the economy which people had to endure in the Border regions.

I hope the Government will give proper recognition to the true situation in Border areas. I represent a Border constituency which is the hinterland of Derry city. When one considers the unemployment statistics in the region, it is not surprising that there is turmoil and violence because when people have no hope, no prospect of employment and no future they will turn to violence. In Donegal in 1982 unemployment figures stood at 9,500. In answer to a Dáil question on 23 April it was stated that the figures had risen to 12,296 by 28 March 1986. That is an increase of 3,000 which does not take into account the number of people who have emigrated and who are unregistered.

In Derry city and in Strabane the unemployment figures are in the region of 40 per cent. The Minister's most significant statement was that discussions are continuing between the Irish and British Governments on the possibility of a European contribution involving the European Communities and other western European countries. We may talk about reports and surveys but the time has come for action to be taken on the material at the disposal of the Minister, the EC and the British Government. Something must be done to alleviate the problems in the region we are now discussing.

The business fraternity in Border regions is devastated because of high taxation. This applies to people who have been in business for years but who have no prospects of continuing because of the tax structures. The Government will have to look at this area if any impact is to be made on developments which may take place in relation to revitalising Border areas by bringing industry to them. If we provided a factory in Buncrana where there is chronic unemployment it would mean nothing to other businesses in that town or those adjacent to it because most of the money would be spent on the other side of the Border where they get better value for money. However, that is another question.

The development of tourism is mentioned in the document and we should address ourselves to that matter. The tourism board are not promoting the north-west region and have not made any significant contribution to the development of tourism in that area. Their policy is to promote Ireland as a region and their defence of the neglect in relation to tourism in the north-west is its inaccessibility. That is a weak argument as we have a national primary route to Belfast from Donegal, right through to the port of Larne. Are any promotional campaigns being organised by the tourist board by advertising that route? I do not think so and indeed I have been confirmed in that view as a result of a meeting with the executive of the Sligo-Leitrim-Donegal Tourist Board yesterday. If we intend to promote tourism, recognition must be given to that area and a promotional campaign must be intensified to ensure the region has the same facilities as the rest of the country.

A survey was carried out in 1980 with regard to the feasibility of setting up a new industrial zone in that area, a complex which would accommodate the Donegal, Strabane and Derry region. This survey was carried out by the Shannon development authorities and the findings must be on the files within the Department. It has been recognised in Brussels that the north west region is the most deprived region in the EC. All that remains to be added is the political will of the Governments concerned. It is significant that a member of the EC who was in Derry recently for a meeting had a special meeting with the Derry City Council. He informed the council that grant aid from the EC could go only so far in solving the unemployment problem. However, at the meeting arranged by councillors who wanted to be advised on what grant aid was available Mr. Denis Kennedy of the European Commission office in Belfast stressed that more money could be on the way if only the British and Irish Governments could agree on cross-Border projects. Mr. Kennedy also pointed out that the flow of grant aid to Northern Ireland has been steadily declining since 1983. That is evident not only on the Northern side but also on the Southern side. Part of the reason for this is the lack of imaginative, innovative and well laid out applications. He added that the local councils could help out in this respect as they knew best the needs of their areas. It is unfortunate that when local councils, and I am a member of a local council, forward projects to Central Government they seem to get lost. When money comes from Brussels only a small proportion is allocated to the Border region.

I would ask the Minister to take cognisance of the fact that unless something is done and some movement is made within the broad parameters which are available to him I cannot foresee any great future for the area. While we welcome this move our best approach lies in our ability to negotiate within the EC to obtain aid for our disadvantaged regions. The most disadvantaged region is the area I represent. The sad thing about representing a Border region which is a hinterland to another portion of the country, which has been cut off from us, and because there is an economic taxation imbalance is that the effects on the economy within that area can be devastating. The Government do not seem to recognise the disadvantages and handicaps the people residing in those areas have to confront. An unnatural Border creates problems for people in their everyday ordinary lives. They have got to cross a frontier which is manned by custom officials and which, unfortunately, is now manned by military forces who set up road blocks at different times. There is no compensation available. They have to put up with it and endure it. They have got to make the best of it.

I hope the Government will take full advantage of this fund to aid the Border areas. I further hope that the Government will use their good offices to exploit to the full the benefits that could accrue from the EC, of which we are a full member, for the better development of a region which is recognised by the EC as being the most deprived region within the EC. Unless we promote the development of the area by attracting industry and unless we give people within the region the right to work out their own existence by their own endeavours in developing, through their own talents and initiative, private industry I see no hope for the region. I have always held the view that the problems which confront the people of the Six Counties emanated from chronic unemployment which was orchestrated, manipulated and manoeuvred by the regime who have controlled the Six Counties for the last sixty years. Derry and Strabane are the areas that have suffered the most. The people of north-east Donegal have suffered along with them because they live in a hinterland of the city of Derry. We have affiliations with every sporting body within the Derry region. We are a community in our own right. If things were any way half normal, I have no doubt that we could live as well as any other community.

With those handicaps and disadvantages, and the chronic tax facing the community in that region, it is not surprising that the area is a virtual wasteland with people selling their businesses and posessions and emigrating. Those people do not see any future for the area. Unless the Government persuade the powers that be in Brussels to give special support to the area in an effort to revive its economy we will go further down the road of no return. There is no incentive to industrialists to set up business there. The area should be given special recognition and aid similar to that given to the mid-west and south-west regions. Those areas were given great support to establish tax free zones. The results of the feasibility studies that were carried out in our area are in the Department and it appears that the EC accept the need for special aid for it. An EC Commissioner I met in Derry indicated that unless there was political will on the part of the British and Irish Governments progress would not be made.

I hope the Government will recognise the problems of the area and will do something positive to give the people a chance to get out of the chronic economic depression that prevails. They have had to live under such conditions for the last 15 years. The young population are well educated and able to adapt to any type of work. Unemployment is a massive problem in the area and it must be tackled by the Government. There is little use in tinkering with it, a major drive against unemployment is needed. We should give the people in the area some hope for the future. It is unfortunate that only 25 per cent of the fund will be made available to the southern region but if we are honest in our concern for the Border regions we cannot be parochial and say that if we are not getting 100 per cent on this side we will block it going to the other side. That is not the way we should view this project. The Donegal, Derry and Strabane regions should be given special consideration. The people there have been denied help for 60 years and they should be given some hope for the future.

It is incumbent on the Government to give to those people the aid denied them in the last 60 years. This gesture from other countries gives the Government an opportunity to rectify that wrong. It will be a sad day if we do not show something up front in the next 12 months. The area has been devastated in the last 15 years by chronic taxation, in particular that imposed by the Government in the last four years.

An Ceann Comhairle

I am calling Deputy O'Malley.

Tomás Mac Giolla

I understood that the Chair would be calling speakers based on the time they spent waiting in the Chamber this afternoon. I have been here all afternoon.

An Ceann Comhairle

I was not in the Chair all afternoon.

Tomás Mac Giolla

Is there any possibility of me getting an assurance that I will get an opportunity to contribute to the debate?

Mr. O'Malley

I have been here for most of the afternoon. I do not intend to speak at any length because I appreciate the difficulty of trying to get in on a debate like this under the arrangements that operate now.

I welcome the agreement we are being asked to ratify today so that it can be brought into effect. Clearly, it is something that most reasonable people will welcome because it cannot do any harm and must do good. My hope is that it will do substantial good for those it is intended to assist because they have suffered a substantial loss in the last 15 years. One has to acknowledge the generosity of the countries involved, the United States of America, Canada, New Zealand and Australia, but must draw attention to the fact that the EC has not yet made or indicated its intention of making any payment to the fund. It is particularly appropriate that it should do so as a Community, in addition to whatever payments may be made in the course of time by individual member states.

Indeed, that part of the Single European Act which is relevant to this matter and which is entitled Economic and Social Cohesion, stops short of making any form of realistic commitment towards assisting the peripheral regions of the Community. It states:

the Community shall aim at reducing disparities between the various regions and the backwardness of the least-favoured regions.

It is a great pity that that is as far as it goes because that is a rather noncommital and purely aspirational expression. There is an opportunity in the establishment of this fund for the Community, as a Community, to make a significant payment into it from either the Regional or Social funds, or both because both are relevant to it.

It is worth drawing attention to the fact that while we have referred to countries that have been generous donors to the fund the giving of donations to it is not confined to countries. That matter should be borne in mind in the United States in particular where substantial funds could be raised from private sources for the objectives of the fund. If the proper approach is made to raise such funds very significant amounts could be obtained. It has always been a difficulty faced by successive Governments here that certain funds could be raised in the United States for expenditure on this island which all of us would have preferred were never raised. This is a very precise fund that will be under public supervision and it is an ideal vehicle for the use of that goodwill in a practical way.

Deputy Leonard and Deputy Harte spoke of the economic difficulties along the Border, particularly on the southern side. Unquestionably, that is true, and it is distressing. I was in Dundalk recently and rarely have I seen a town anywhere that is more depressed, with virtually every premises up for sale, formally or potentially, but they are unsaleable. It is distressing, too, to see the Lifford-Strabane areas. Though Strabane suffered proportionately perhaps more severely than any other town or area in Northern Ireland, in the early years of this trouble at any rate, it is now more prosperous than Lifford. The reason for that, of course, is the major tax difference on the two sides of the Border. That will continue to be the case as long as substantially higher direct and indirect taxes are levied on this side of the Border. When there are two different jurisdictions on one small island, neither can operate in a vacuum or in isolation one from the other, and we had better learn that as soon as we can. Otherwise, towns on the southern side will become even more depressed.

The agreement for the establishment of this fund is only one aspect of the Anglo-Irish Agreement, and perhaps it is not out of place, now that it is almost 12 months since its signature, to look back on what the situation has been. One thing is clear: though there may be differences of views and opinions between the British and Irish Governments in relation to this problem, there appears to be a genuine effort on the part of both to reach reasonable levels of agreement on how these difficulties should be approached.

One might take that for granted now, but I was a member of a Government here in 1971 when we got a curt two-line note from the British Prime Minister of the day informing us that nothing that happened in Northern Ireland was any of our business. There has been an enormous change of position by the British Government. They have learned that the views they expressed and the attitudes they followed 15 years ago are now seen to be entirely erroneous — they were then and that is now acknowledged. It is seen that the Republic of Ireland and its Government have a legitimate say in things that happen on the other side of the Border.

Unfortunately, there is just as great a gulf, but in a different direction, as there was 15 years ago. The gulf now is not between the two Governments, because the British have changed very fundamentally in their attitude: it is between the two communities in Northern Ireland. There is extreme polarisation in Northern Ireland that was not there 15 and 20 years ago but which, as a result of prolonged violence, is there today.

In some respects it is ironic that we are discussing this agreement a day after the performance that went on in the Ulster Hall in Belfast last night. It shows the different reactions to this agreement and the fundamental importance of the agreement. What we are discussing here today and what was passed in the British House of Commons a week or two ago is the reaction of the international community in trying to assist in alleviating the divisions and the violence that are part and parcel of Northern Ireland. On the other hand, last night we had the reaction of other people to this agreement, to the fund and all the things that go with it: they regarded it as appropriately expressed in the raising of yet another private army, as if that will contribute anything to the solution of difficulties.

It is well to remember that there were 1,000 people in the Ulster Hall last night and that there are hundreds of thousands of unionists who were not there and who would find an activity such as the raising or the dedication of a private army as abhorrent as I would and as nearly all Members of this House would. One of the tasks that faces the two Governments today is to try to arrange things so that that large number of moderate and unbigoted people on the unionist side in Northern Irland would get some sort of opportunity to assert themselves. This will not be done easily. It is a delicate and difficult task to arrive at that desirable objective, but the lesson we should have learned during the past 12 months since the signing of the agreement is that a way must be found to enable the people on the Unionist side to realise that the old system is over, that there has to be change and that they have to be given the opportrunity to accommodate change. When they are intelligent enough to see that when they are lacking in the bigotry that some of the public spokesmen seem to be imbued with, they will have to be accommodated. The efforts of everyone of good will should be aimed towards trying to enable that to happen. The objectives of this agreement are set out in Article 2 and are excellently put:

The objectives of the Fund are to promote economic and social advance, to encourage contact, dialogue and reconciliation between Nationalists and Unionists throughout Ireland.

I fully subscribe to that even though it has to be long term in its effects. One of the areas to which the Intergovernmental Conference might well give some attention is education in Northern Ireland. People must now begin to ask themselves whether, in the specially polarised conditions of the North, it is appropriate to maintain a sectarian form of education, which may not do any harm in more normal societies but which cannot be beneficial in the conditions which have evolved in Northern Ireland and whether something can be done, through the Intergovernmental Conference or otherwise, to encourage a change in that position. I acknowledge that is something not likely to be achieved in the short-term. Unfortunately nowadays when we think of Northern Ireland in the short-term it becomes more and more difficult to think positively. We must have some long-term feelings and thoughts about it also.

This fund is important for what it will do for people living in relative economic deprivation as a result of all of these events. It is particularly important that it has widespread international recognition on the part of many of the leading countries in the world, of the horror of the situation obtaining in part of this island, of their anxiety, joined with ours, to try to bring about commonsense and reconciliation, bringing the nightmare to an end.

Tomás Mac Giolla

Not for the first time I find myself in a minority speaking in this House. I am not surprised. Earlier on I was worried we would not have sufficient time to debate this, what I regard as a very important subject and a totally unique occasion. Apart from the Minister, there was no other front bench speaker and just one back bench speaker from the Government side so far. On the Fianna Fáil side we have a five minutes speech from Deputy G. Collins and then some Border counties spokesmen looking for their share of the cake. That is the pitiful position to which we have been reduced, scrabbling here for these few miserable dollars to ascertain what we can get for our own areas and how it should be allocated.

The Minister mentioned in February last that it was nearly impossible to get in the door of his office with all of the submissions piling up inside it. The establishment of the fund had only been announced and they were all scrabbling for a few dollars. At the time of the signing of the Anglo-Irish Agreement the Minister and the Government were announcing 1,000 million dollars or five hundred million dollars. That figure has since come down to something like 250 million dollars. The American Government have made no announcement at all of how many dollars there are involved and Congress have passed only 120 million dollars. We are talking at present about 50 million dollars for the current year, something of that nature.

At the same point in February last the Minister spoke of the generosity of the American Government. I greatly admire the generosity of the American people but I have never seen any generosity on the part of the American Government in their hand-outs. In fact the American Government are the new imperial power who use the dollar as their invading army and they have conquered all of South America with American aid in dollars. They maintain their control by beginning to give aid. The carrot and the stick then is whether they will stop or increase the aid which controls their foreign policy. That is evident throughout the world. I invite Deputies to look again at the whole question of American aid, the question of generosity or otherwise that may be involved.

In this case the history is that it was first announced in 1977 by President Carter in an unprecedented statement by an American President, when he announced that American aid would be available if an agreement between the two Governments could be reached. The record of American aid is that they use it to develop client Governments who will bend to their will. The great danger for Ireland is that once we accept the principle of American aid by way of this fund, we will be sucked into the position in which the factor determining our foreign policy — rather than having a principled approach to international affairs as we used have 20 or 30 years ago — will be to ensure that we will not upset our friends who are giving us this money. Therfore, the financial position will decide our Government's foreign policy issues.

In the past year, since the signing of the Anglo-Irish Agreement since this question of American aid was first raised, there has been evidence of a distinct shift in Irish foreign policy away from the neutral position we had maintained over the years towards a more pro-American stance on a number of issues. In December last, shortly after the Anglo-Irish Agreement had been signed, the Irish delegation to the United Nations abstained on a resolution calling for the lifting of the US trade embargo on Nicaragua. That constituted a distinct shift in policy on the part of our Government. That UN resolution was sponsored by Algeria, Mexico, Nicaragua and Peru and was supported by 84 of the UN members. The preceding May our Government had fully supported a UN resolution which, among other things, called on all States to refrain from carrying out, supporting or promoting economic or military actions of any kind against any State in the region which might impede the Contadora peace process. The Government had broken a very strong position on that. If there was any doubt as to whether there was a shift in our international policy, surely it has been confirmed by the cowardly performance of the Minister for Foreign Affairs at the time of the US attack on Tripoli last April. That was an occasion when the Irish people would have expected that our Minister would have condemned that action.

Mr. P. Barry

If that was so it was a very brave performance, not a cowardly one.

Tomás Mac Giolla

It was condemned by a wide range of opinion including the World Council of Churches, the United Nations, the non-aligned movement, by neutral countries. Indeed, it was even condemned by the United States NATO partners but our Minister persistently refused at the time to condemn the United States action. That refusal was seen as an effort not to disturb the Americans because of the possibility of interfering with this US aid. That is a very likely cause of the departure from the position which had obtained before. I am sure the Minister will agree we had at all times condemned with great vigour all acts of terrorism of any kind and this was a similar type of action which, in the normal course of events, the Irish Government would have condemned in the past.

It is too much to expect our people to see these shifts in our foreign policy as having nothing to do with the Anglo-Irish Agreement or this US aid package. If the cost of US financial aid is to remain silent on areas of international policy in respect of which we adopted a strong stance in the past, if we are now to alter our position in this respect — particularly the example I mentioned of attempts to overthrow the democratically elected Government of Nicaragua — because of the danger of losing this fund it would be much too high a price to pay.

Adopting a subservient attitude as a result of the possibility of gaining money is shaming the Irish nation. Our people are proud. All Irish people wish that we would hold our heads high and be independent in international affairs, even if we are poor. Possibly the only real hallmark of our independence since this State was founded has been our international neutrality, our strong international position, a principled position which we held no matter who was annoyed. If we lose that independence, no money would be worth it and certainly not 120 million dollars or even 250 million dollars, a figure which was mentioned.

Last February the Minister said that so far there has been no official indication of the amount of money involved. In the Department of Foreign Affairs bulletin of September last, Iris Rinne na Gnóthaí Eachtracha, it was stated that the US Congress authorised a sum of 120 million dollars. It also stated that the Irish, British and US Governments signed an agreement covering the dispersal of the first tranche of 50 million dollars of US support. That is the figure that we are talking about. A sum of 120 million dollars was passed by Congress. Canada is to donate 10 million dollars over ten years and in order to make it look more international, New Zealand was brought into it and a figure of 300,000 dollars was mentioned. Basically we are talking about the American money.

I should like to make some general points on the fund. In the agreement the serious under-employment and multiple deprivation which created this problem in Northern Ireland is referred to. In the first preamble it states that serious under-employment and multiple deprivation create an environment in which instability can flourish and that instability and conflict in turn create conditions inimical to social and economic progress. It has been the policies of the Coalition Government here and the Tory Government in Northern Ireland which have contributed more than anything else to the unemployment, under-employment and multiple deprivation which exists on both sides of the Border. While these policies continue, this multiple deprivation and under-empoyment will continue.

When Mrs. Thatcher first took office in 1979 unemployment in Northern Ireland was 60,000. It has more than doubled since then and is now 130,000. Social services, health, education and housing have all been subjected to sweeping cuts. This year the Northern Ireland Housing Executive budget has been cut by £44 million sterling. That is considerably more than the 50 million dollars we are talking about. What is the function of this money? Is it simply to provide a subsidy to the British Government? Three-quarters of it will go to the British Government and one-quarter to the Irish Government who have their own cutbacks. What will be the net gain if the money is allocated to Northern Ireland and if the British Government continue to make further financial cutbacks?

We have been told that this money is to be used by firms North and South. The political philosophy of the manner in which the money is to be spent is set down very clearly in three separate sections. Article 3 states that in pursuance of these objectives the fund shall stimulate private investment and enterprise, supplement public programmes and encourage voluntary effort. Section 4(a) speaks of the stimulation of private sector investment, in particular by means of venture capital arrangements using some of the resources of the fund. Article 9 states that the fund shall provide money for and initiate the establishment of two investment companies, one to be established in each part of Ireland with a significant number of common directors and similar objectives whose function will be to furnish venture capital for the private sector.

I understand the American Ambassador stated earlier in the year that the funds being allocated must not be used for an enterprise in which the State will have an involvement. There are very serious restrictions on the manner in which the money is to be used. It is to be used for the private sector. Deputy Harte wants the money to be used to get garages along the Border back in business. I do not know what private sector will be helped by this money but the philosophy is set out very clearly. It is clear that the objectives of the agreement are largely to promote the private enterprise system, the system which has led to the deprivation, the unemployment and the general disaster on both sides of the Border.

Attention should be drawn to the composition of the board. It is made up of the predictable collection of businessmen, people who can be relied on not to offend the private enterprise system and the ethic of both Governments involved. The significant thing about this group is that there is no representative of the working class people and no representative of the underemployed and the people suffering from multiple deprivation. On this board there is no one who has the slightest understanding of the problems of the ordinary people in Northern Ireland, who has any idea of what it is like to live in the deprived areas, in the Protestant and Catholic ghettoes in Belfast and Derry, or what it is like to be unemployed, poorly housed or constantly harassed and intimidated by paramilitaries. The people who will be involved in this fund — I do not know what say our Government had in their appointment — do not understand the problems which they say they are there to heal.

The objectives of the fund, as Deputy O'Malley quoted, are to promote economic and social advance and to encourage contact, dialogue and reconciliation between nationalists and unionists throughout Ireland. How in God's name are they going to do that? Whatever hope there was of doing it a year ago, there is very little hope of doing it today. They are now so far apart that if one threw the dollars along the middle of the road neither side would go out to pick them up. How will we encourage contact, dialogue and reconciliation at a time when the whole policy which is being promoted has had the effect of driving people further apart?

I am well aware, and have said so constantly, that the main factor in driving Protestants and Catholics apart in Northern Ireland has been the Provisionals' bombing, and shooting and murder campaign there. People right through that period and through that campaign were working constantly in an endeavour to have a solid group of Catholics and Protestants who wanted to work together or at least to promote peace rather than killing and shooting. In the past year the unfortunate effect of the attempt in this Anglo-Irish Agreement has been to isolate the Unionist and Protestant population, give them a kick in the teeth, show them that nobody was going to pay any attention to them any more and to promote the SDLP and have them toasted in Brussels, Dublin, London and Washington.

Mr. MacGahon

What about Canada?

Tomás Mac Giolla

Deputy MacGahon is in a different world. We are talking about Northern Ireland and the people involved in that have been the British Government, the Government here in Dublin, the American Government and, of course, the SDLP who were the promoters from the beginning, with John Hume, over the last three, four or five years. The effect of that isolation attempt has been to unify the Protestant unionist people as never before, to drive them further apart from their Catholic neighbours, to intimidate people further and to create new barriers of galvanised walls between people in Belfast and other parts of the North so that all the work in that area of reconciliation of the groups involved has been wiped out. I am not saying it is impossible or that nobody is talking to anybody, but the possibilties for development along peaceful lines have been put much further away than they were previously.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputy Mac Giolla, I remind you that you must conclude at 6.30 p.m. and I have two Deputies offering.

Tomás Mac Giolla

I will conclude. As I said, I felt from the beginning that much more time should be allocated for this debate. I do not want to deprive other Deputies of their opportunity to speak and I know Deputy McGahon has points he wants to make here in the House. He has referred to them on previous occasions. I wish to draw the attention of the House to the dangers involved in accepting American Government aid. I am not worried if the American Government just want to throw money to us. That is all right and we should use it to the best advantage, but the effects are beginning to be seen already. I worry very much about the effect on our Government policy and on the attitude of our people to handouts and to American aid at a time when we are pretty poverty stricken and in big debt, and when we are promised £50 million or £100 million next year we will make our foreign policy conform to that handout attitude.

Mr. McGahon

I deplore Deputy Mac Giolla's shameful attitude to the great American nation that I, like so many other Irishmen, admire. He has handed an insult to the 40 million ethnic Irish in that great nation. While I am not surprised at his attitude, I am rather disappointed at his dog in the manger attitude to the very generous contribution by the American nation in their effort to bring to an end the appalling tragedy that is Ulster. Also, his use of the phrase "working class" is a chilling preview of what life would be like under a Marxist-Socialist Government. Deputy Mac Giolla never loses an opportunity to attack the nation that is closest to the Irish people, the American nation. His reaction is totally blank to the aid they have given to the free world starting with the Marshall Aid plan at the end of the last world war and he is always silent about the atrocities of the Russian Government. While he never loses an opportunity to include Nicaragua he choses to ignore the appalling rape of Afghanistan and countries under the yoke of the hammer and sickle. So much for his Socialist and Marxist philosophy.

As a Border Deputy I have watched over the past 20 years the crucifixion of the two communities in the north. At one stage in the early seventies I lived within two miles of the Border and I am married to a girl from across the Border. I have watched with mounting horror the atrocities being perpetrated by both sides, by the two wild extremists in the two communities. I watched with horror the atrocities committed by the Official IRA in the early seventies. Many questions still remain to be answered about the activities of that sector of the community.

Tomás Mac Giolla

I will answer any questions the Deputy wants me to.

Mr. McGahon

As a Border Deputy I congratulate all concerned in the Anglo-Irish initiative and in particular I congratulate the Taoiseach and the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Barry, on their untiring efforts over four years. They have succeeded in getting the British Government to acknowledge in a written agreement for the first time in 70 years that some day they will vacate this country and that unhappy part of Ireland. That was a tremendous achievement, and history will evaluate their efforts very highly. It was not easy to achieve against a very unyielding Mrs. Thatcher and an unholy alliance of unionists, Provisional IRA and INLA and on some occasions the begrudging attitute of the Fianna Fáil Party to this historic document. As one person who felt that the problem of Ireland was insoluble, I believe now that we can at some time in the future achieve reconciliation in the North.

We can thank the nations of the world who have contributed so magnificently and generously to this thrust, particularly the American nation, and the Canadian Government for their contribution of £10 million. This is recognition by the Governments of the world of the appalling, awful tragedy of Ireland and the division of this country. The political parties should acknowledge this great feat, put their shoulder to the wheel and support the Government rather than indulging in nit-picking exercises and dog in the manger attitudes.

In regard to the composition of the board, I congratulate the Government on their very careful selection. I acknowledge the appointment of a man from my own region, Mr. Neil McCann, a businessman of international renown who has made a great success of his life and will do full justice to the board. The other members of the board are all eminent men and I feel they will do a good job in achieving the desired objective, economic progress on either side of the Border.

I do not begrudge the amount of money that will be spent in the Six Counties because that land has been tortured over the past 18 or 19 years. I hope it will bring some semblance of peace along the Border. I have watched my region being blighted. In Dundalk and north County Louth we have borne the brunt of the Ulster troubles. I feel very sore that successive Governments have not appreciated the economic deprivation that has occurred. We have fallen from the pinnacle we once occupied as the best business town in Ireland and withered to economic extinction. I fear that with the coming of Christmas, very large amounts of money will flow across the Border adding further nails in our coffin. However, we take some comfort from the fact that we have been told Dundalk will be one of the chief beneficiaries of the Anglo-Irish money and the quicker the money is allocated the better.

I want to express some apprehension about the activities of the outlawed Ulster Freedom Fighters and their very frightening threats of bombs and retaliation in the south. As a Border man I fear for the people of my region. We suffered a tragic fatal bombing in 1972 when two perfectly innocent men I knew very well lost their lives. There is a feeling of anxiety in Dundalk tonight and in all Border towns because of these threats. I exhort the Government, although I know they do not need to hear my words to spur them into action, to ensure that all towns along the Border will be given maximum security against the threats of these outrageous people.

Mr. Kirk

Six minutes is a very short time indeed to deal with the problems and economic difficulties we have on the Border, but I will have to try to give a synopsis.

I fear that the international fund money will be projected by the Coalition Government as the solution to the economic problems affecting the Border regions and that mere infrastructural projects will take care of the severe unemployment that exists in County Louth where over 8,000 are unemployed, over 4,000 in the Border town of Dundalk.

In this House and at other venues I have listened to the excuse being put forward that the economic ills of Dundalk and other Border towns flow directly from the northern troubles. I submit that that is not so. If it contributes it is a very small factor indeed. The major contributory factor has been the price differentials and the differences in the levels of taxation. The outflow of funds from our area northwards because of this has rebounded in turn on the trading sector with many businesses in Dundalk, Castleblayney, Ardee and other Border towns going into liquidation.

We are approximately four years into Coalition Government here and there has been a complete lack of awareness of the economic ills affecting Border areas. We have been treated to some verbal promises as to what will be done. Unfortunately the sort of concrete measures that need to be taken are not in the pipeline. If they are, the Coalition Ministers have not been telling us about them, unless a general election brings them out, and at that stage it would be unrealistic to expect that promises will provide an instant solution.

The industrial base of Louth was very traditional and labour intensive. The natural environment for industry is still there. We are fortunate to have a regional college and a more than adequate infrastructure. We have the skills and the know-how which unfortunately are not being utilised because they are in the hands of the unemployed of this town. Some time ago I asked the Government to consider the possibility of establishing an industrial development agency on a pilot basis for County Louth but we have had no response yet. Many feel that in the various agencies who have direct or indirect responsibility, there is a lack of the co-ordination and effort that we need to give an edge to our industrial promotions. I believe that the problem of perhaps some of this money being put towards an industrial development agency to come to terms with unemployment and to stimulate the industrial development which in turn will create the employment locally needs to be tackled immediately.

I am sorry I must finish now since the time scale is very restrictive and the Minister wishes to commence at 6.30. I hope when the Minister comes to reply he will freely recognise and admit that there has been a grievous neglect of the Border areas and County Louth in particular. I hope he will tell us tonight that it is the Government's intention to bring forward the sort of measures which are needed immediately to tackle these problems.

Mr. M. Brennan

As a Deputy from a Border area, County Leitrim, there is one point I would like to mention. This is the only Border county which does not have a direct link with Northern Ireland. There is no road open between County Leitrim and County Fermanagh. If anything is to be done for this county under the Anglo-Irish Agreement, I hope County Leitrim will be given a direct link with County Fermanagh and that the road will once again be opened.

Minister for Foreign Affairs (Mr. P. Barry)

Deputy Kirk appears to be under a misapprehension as to what this debate is all about. He must not have read my speech. This debate has nothing to do with the Government's contribution to the Border. He said that the Government project the fund as being their solution to the Border region. Had he read my contribution he would know I said the opposite. The Government have nothing to do with this fund and that fact was welcomed by Deputy Leonard. Most Deputies recognise that this was a very positive move. In case Deputy Kirk did not get a copy of my speech, I will provide one for him.

I want to thank the House for the welcome they have given to the International Fund for Ireland. The setting up of this fund is another milestone not alone in our relations with Britain but also with those countries which have so generously contributed to this fund. That fact was recognised and welcomed by all Members of this House, with one notable exception, Deputy Mac Giolla. I thought his contribution was mean, begrudging and carping. He failed to respond to the generosity of the American people in making available considerable funds for this country. The practical assistance underlines the links of kinship and history between the people of this island and abroad. It is worth noting that the countries which were first in with their contributions — Canada, America and New Zealand — have strong ties of kinship and friendship with Ireland. There are many people of Irish descent living in those three countries.

This fund will have a major impact on the Border areas and, as Deputy O'Malley said, it is hoped it will bring about peace and reconciliation between the different traditions on this island. It was the intention of both Governments who signed the Anglo-Irish Agreement, which included a clause in relation to this fund, that it would make such a contribution. I believe this is the motivation behind the three countries which have already contributed to the fund and I am sure it will have that effect.

I want to reply to a number of points which have been raised. Deputy Collins, Deputy Conaghan and Deputy O'Malley asked about the contributions from the EC fund. Over a number of months we have held discussions with the British Government about the possibility of a Community contribution, because the Community would wish to have a joint approach from the two countries. As recently as yesterday I spoke to the British Foreign Secretary about it and we have arranged a meeting of officials from both sides in the very near future to thresh out the methodology of a joint approach in this regard. The question of access to the EC structural fund for cross-Border projects is important and has been raised by a number of Deputies, including Deputy Leonard, but this is not related to the international fund. This could be debated at a different time. I will bring to the attention of the Department of Finance the points raised here by a number of Deputies when the applications to the structural fund are being made.

Deputy Collins made a very important point. The US Congress, through this fund and the reporting back procedure, will continue to have a valid and continuing interest in this country and in the progress of the Anglo-Irish Agreement. The President of the United States is by law required to report back each year on the criteria set out in the fund — the extent to which the fund has contributed to reconciliation between the communities in Northern Ireland, ensuring the US contribution is meeting the objectives of encouraging new investment, job creation, economic reconstruction on the basis of strict equality of opportunity — this is a very important point — and that the fund has increased respect for human rights and fundamental freedom for all the people in Northern Ireland.

Deputy Harte made a number of very important points, one of which has been mentioned by nearly all Deputies, about the decimation of the Border towns, the effect that different levels of taxation are having on both sides of the Border and the effect the troubles are having not just on the Border areas but on the Irish economy. I pointed out on a number of occasions recently the cost of the troubles in the North to the Irish taxpayers. It is a bit late for Deputy Mac Giolla to come into this House and berate our efforts to deal with this problem. When we established the New Ireland Forum almost four years ago Members were invited to participate on a party basis. Deputy Mac Giolla's party were invited but they did not accept. If he wanted to make a contribution towards bringing about reconciliation between the traditions in the North, he had the opportunity then, but he did not take it. It is a bit late for him to come into this House and lecture us on this and on other matters relating to Northern Ireland. He accused us of being in the pockets of the Americans with the handful of dollars. He described this as a slush fund, I do not now where he gets that type of vocabulary or how he thinks it applies to a democratically elected parliament——

Mr. G. Collins

He is probably watching too many Clint Eastwood films.

Mr. McGahon

With Russian subtitles.

Mr. P. Barry

This fund was established and contributed to by three countries the democratic structure of which was never in doubt. Through their Governments the people of those countries are freely and willingly contributing to this fund. It is a matter of which I am very proud. Deputy Mac Giolla and his party declined the invitation to take part in the debate in the New Ireland Forum in which he would have learned a lot, including the cost of violence to this country and the problems in Northern Ireland over the last 15 to 17 years.

That was quantified by very eminent economists at the time, for the Forum, and it quantified the loss in tourism to this economy, as £1,180 million in that period. The extra cost of security because of the troubles in the North was counted as being £900 million, up to 1984. It has cost us more since. That is the extra cost, not the cost of our existing Garda and Army. Our Army has doubled over that period and the Garda force has increased by two thirds. These are extra costs to the taxpayer. The Border regions have been affected and I would not dream of suggesting that they have not been hardest hit of all the regions. It was in recognition of that that the fund was divided between North and South. Deputy Leonard referred to how this fund would be spent in the Border regions. I would draw his attention to paragraph 2, page 4, of my speech where I said:

The Agreement provides that approximately three-quarters of the resources of the Fund will be spent in Northern Ireland with the remainder expended here. In its operation in this jurisdiction, I expect that the Fund will give particular consideration to the Border areas.

It is in recognition of the fact that the Border areas have been badly affected, that the division of the Fund was decided on. The economy of the whole island has been severely damaged by the violence of the last 17 or 18 years.

Our primary objective must be the humanitarian one of saving lives. We all know that 2,700 lives have been lost during that time. We know the appalling carnage that has gone on and we know of the damage to property. We know, too, that the divisions that have been created have had political backing and have been unfortunately accepted, at least in those 17 years, as the norm in Northern Ireland. For those reasons the British Government entered into negotiations on the Anglo-Irish Agreement. Another reason is the economic cost to both parts of the country. A number of Deputies have drawn attention to the fact that the Border is badly damaged. I fully accept that.

Deputy Leonard made a good point, which I presume he will make to the board when it is established, that a lot of work in the Border areas has already been done in a number of studies that have taken place. Deputy Leonard also said he was glad to see that the Government stipulated that there be a distancing of both Governments from the operation of this fund so that the board will be entirely independent of representations from Governments. I would underline that point. So far as I am concerned the board will not be interfered with; they will be quite free. They will be given advice by civil servants from a number of Departments here and in the North, but they will make their own decisions independently of any politicians, Government or Opposition, North or South. I give that undertaking here and now.

Deputy Leonard referred to the £10 million promised by the Taoiseach when he was in Dundalk about a month or six weeks ago. The Deputy may be under the impression that the Taoiseach promised this out of the fund. The Taoiseach could not do that, as he has no say in the fund.

Mr. J. Leonard

I wondered where he was going to get this.

Mr. P. Barry

It was nothing to do with this at all. It was totally separate.

(Interruptions.)

Mr. P. Barry

Deputy Leonard also made a point, with which I agree — that the fund should be separate from——

Mr. G. Collins

He is putting £10 million by for your seat, Deputy McGahon.

(Interruptions.)

Mr. P. Barry

To cover all the remarks that have been made here about how the fund should be spent and administered, I will ensure that all seven members of the board will get copies of the debate in the House today so that they can consider all the points raised. I take the point made by Deputy Leonard that the fund should not be a substitution for funds already available but should be in addition to them.

Deputy Conaghan said he thought the violence was emanating from unemployment and that if that was cured there would not be a necessity for this fund. That is not correct, although I wish it was. It is undoubtedly a contributory factor in that it provides a pool in which paramilitaries can fish for young men and women frustrated with the whole system who are looking for an easy way out. There is no doubt that behind these innocent young men when they are recruited are evil people on both sides of the divide who are manipulating them.

Deputies

Hear, hear.

Mr. P. Barry

Although unemployment provides a source it is not the root cause of the violence. The root cause is political and until we solve the political problem and find a way in which the two communities can live together in peace and with respect for each others' rights and traditions, the violence will continue.

Deputy O'Malley was quite right in saying that the signing of the Anglo-Irish Agreement is a major step forward and that it has the posssibility of bringing peace and reconciliation. Deputy O'Malley referred to the fact that he was a member of a Government who, 15 years ago, got a curt two line note from the British Government to say that their views were not welcome and that they had nothing to do with the running of Northern Ireland. Much more recently than that, only four years ago, the British Prime Minister answered a question in the House of Commons by saying that the Irish Government have no say nor would they ever have a say in the running of Northern Ireland. I do not say that in a sense of triumphalism, at having changed that position. The Forum report had a major influence in changing attitudes in Britain about Ireland and particularly about the North. It was the voice of Irish nationalism being presented in a reasonable way with very generous offers in it and fully backed up with documentation as to how we saw the future of this island. It was that generosity and that detailed submission that grabbed the attention of the British Government, particularly the British Prime Minister, to show that here was a problem that could not be wished away and that it was not about sovereignty, loyalty or anything else but about a genuine problem of alienation in which a large slice of the population of Northern Ireland were against the regime of Government under which they lived. It was that that changed the attitudes. The change is a fundamental change and the agreement of which this fund is part, with courage on both sides, can bring about the objectives of that agreement in the future. I thank the House for their warm welcome, with one exception, for this essential part of the Anglo-Irish Agreement.

Question put and agreed to.

Dáil Éireann debate - Tuesday, 11 Nov 1986

Internal Fund for Ireland: Motion.

Deputies

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 11 Nov 1986