Vol. 387 No. 4
asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if, in view of the severe problems of hunger and deprivation being experienced in South East Asian countries such as Vietnam and Kampuchea, the Government have any plans for the provision of financial, food or technical aid to these countries; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
48.
asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if the Government support at national and EC level the provision of aid on a humanitarian basis to Kampuchea.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 18 and 48 together.
Ireland has provided some humanitarian assistance in the past to the people of Cambodia and Vietnam, both through non-governmental organisations and through the appropriate United Nations agencies. It is in principle willing to do so again.
The Vietnamese occupation of Cambodia has now lasted for over a decade in violation of the Charter of the United Nations and the fundamental principles of international law. In these circumstances the European Community does not provide reconstruction and development aid to Vietnam, or to a Cambodia which is so occupied. It should, however, be noted that, although official European Community assistance is not provided to the Vietnamese Government or to the Heng Samrin regime, the Community continues to provide various forms of humanitarian and emergency assistance to the people of Cambodia and Vietnam. The Community remains open to providing, when necessary, humanitarian and emergency assistance to the people of those countries and we of course would contribute to this through our membership of the Community.
In 1988, the total value of Community assistance in relation to Cambodia was over six MECU and over 2.5 MECU in relation to Vietnam. In respect of Cambodia, 3.2 MECU was given for Cambodian refugees on the Thai/Cambodia border and 2.8 MECU was given for various projects in Cambodia operated by non-governmental organisations. In respect of Vietnam, the Community assistance was in the form of cereals and other foods given via other agencies or as emergency assistance.
Would the Minister accept that, in view of the scale of need, the level of aid is pitifully small, especially when compared with the hopeful political developments in recent times which would remove any reservations? Would the Minister not agree that on humanitarian grounds through our own organisations, for example, Trócaire——
That is right.
——operating in this area and through Oxfam, we would have avenues through which we could engage in direct aid, channelled through such organisations which have established contacts? This would ensure that the aid was allocated on a basis we could support.
I certainly agree with the Deputy on channeling aid through reputable organisations of the kind mentioned by her. Particularly in places like Cambodia and Vietnam, on the question of getting contact with any Government or administrative authority to pass on aid there is great difficulty. We have always operated in that part of the world through non-governmental organisations and rightly so. I shall examine possibilities of improving that operation through the bodies referred to by the Deputy, bodies that are very active there, such as Concern and Trócaire.
I find the attitude both of this Government and of the EC extraordinary in terms of double thinking in relation to Kampuchea. If the Vietnamese had not intervened in Kampuchea, the Khmer Rouge would be still annihilating the population there. Would the Minister indicate what percentage of the EC aid that has gone to these two countries has been provided by this country? What steps is he taking as Minister for Foreign Affairs to get the EC to increase their aid and to consider, as a matter of urgency, reconstruction aid that is also needed for these two countries?
We have given a great deal of money to various non-governmental organisations. As a country we have given £75,000 in answer to a request for disaster relief support in Cambodia. We have also given allocations in respect of joint UNICEF programmes to which we are a subscribing country. Those are only some of the areas to which we have given funds. We have given funds in these areas, rightly, through non-governmental agencies or through international organisations such as UNICEF or the Community itself. That is the only practical way to operate. With regard to Deputy De Rossa's question about the percentage, we pay whatever percentage is sought from us. Each country gets a bill, as it were, from the Community and we pay our share.
How much?
Then the Community allocate the proceeds of their scheme. I shall get the figure for the Deputy if it will be of any use to him, but the amount is no less than was sought from us. This is done on a basis of computation by the Community of contributions from member countries. We pay our share of that.
How much is that?
I have not got the figure here.
What percentage, even?
I shall send it to the Deputy.
I call Question No. 19.
This is very unsatisfactory. There is a direct question in relation to aid to these countries and the Minister does not appear to have the information sought.
I do not have the Community aid figure.
That is not the concern of the Chair.
This is channeled through Community agencies to those countries. We pay our full subscription to that Community fund for allocation to the countries concerned. That is the position. The computation is made up in Brussels. The figure sought is got from each country on a certain percentage basis. The contributions are put together and allocated by the Community.
They are so small that the Minister would be ashamed to tell them to the House.
I have called Question No. 19.
In the two countries concerned, Cambodia and Vietnam, it is much more sensible to have a large organisation such as the Community doing the work, rather than the Irish Government doing the work directly.
