Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 20 Jul 1989

Vol. 391 No. 7

Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Official Development Assistance.

3.

asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs the total amount allocated for Irish Overseas Development Aid for 1988 and 1989; if he will give these figures as a percentage of gross national product; if the achievement of a level of 0.7 per cent of gross national product is a policy objective of the Government; if so, when that target is likely to be met; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

13.

asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if he will restore the level of funding for Overseas Development Aid in view of the urgent need for such aid.

43.

asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, in the absence of any mention of development assistance in the agreed coalition pact for government, if he will outline the Government's intentions in relation to our reaching the United Nations target of 0.7 per cent of gross national product.

I propose to take Questions Nos. 3, 13 and 43 together.

The Government remains committed to achieving the UN target of 0.7 per cent of GNP for Official Development Assistance. This was first adopted by Ireland in 1970 and has been accepted by every Government since then. No date has ever been set for its attainment and in the present budgetary circumstances it is not possible to set a date at this point. However, it is the intention of the Government to work towards it as our economic circumstances permit.

The amounts allocated for Official Development Assistance for 1988, revised, and 1989 were £32.9 million and £33.8 million respectively. A further £700,000 is being allocated this year for disaster relief. The percentage of GNP for each year is 0.18 per cent approximately.

May I ask the Minister if he would like to reflect again on the information he gave the Dáil when he stated that no year has ever been specified for the achievement of the UN target? Would the Minister not agree that recent developments have involved the abandonment of expressing any percentage increase one year taken following another or any percentage increase as applied in 1982 towards meeting the target of the UN? Is it not true that it would be useful to establish the base figure for overseas development aid that is accountable within the Department of Foreign Affairs?

I do not agree with the assertions made by Deputy Higgins in his question. I said the target was first adopted by this country in 1970——

——and has been accepted by all Governments since then. I am sure it is the regret of all Governments that we have not reached that target but it is still a target of this Government to try to reach that level of our GNP. The reality is that as our economic circumstances improve we will make greater progress in reaching that target.

I will clarify my supplementary question a little. It is a fact that in 1981 and 1982 there was an expressed achievement one year taken following another of improvements which it was estimated were necessary in overseas development aid taking a base figure. I repeat my question to the Minister: is it not true that not only has that increase been abandoned but in addition any commitment to the base of overseas development aid has also been abandoned and the figure he quoted to this House included lottery moneys which are not accountable within the realm of his Department?

It is true to say that there were greater efforts to achieve the target for a considerable number of years but when our economic circumstances deteriorated, as they did, that annual increase as a percentage of GNP did not materialise. In fact, there has been a reduction in recent years. I am not telling Deputy Higgins anything he does not know; this reduction did take place. It is not true for the Deputy to say that there is an abandonment of the ideal of achieving that target. The achievement of that target still exists and, hopefully, as economic circumstances improve the quicker we will achieve it.

May I finally ask the Minister when we might anticipate the return of overseas development aid to the Department of Foreign Affairs as a policy item rather than depending on the lottery? Would the Minister not agree that making this aid reliant on lottery funding is a removal of overseas development aid from the policy realm of the Department of Foreign Affairs?

The Deputy is bringing in extraneous matter.

The Deputy can rest assured that as far as this Government are concerned we will do everything we can — bearing in mind the reality of the economic position as it obtains — to try and push that figure closer and closer to the target set and accepted my us and all Governments since 1970.

The Minister has learned the language of diplomacy very fast indeed. That is the most polite way I have ever heard of saying "no".

The target set many years ago was 0.7 per cent of GNP and it now stands at 0.18 per cent. Will the Minister give the House a commitment today that he will seek an increase in overseas development aid in next year's Estimates? Will he agree that, at a minimum, that figure should be doubled?

Deputy De Rossa knows full well that it is grossly unfair of him to ask for a personal commitment from me to bring about the increase we would all desire.

To seek to do so.

The Deputy knows as well as anybody else that the decision in this area will be reached by the Government but he can rest assured a good case will be presented to the Government.

I am asking the Minister to give the House a commitment that he will seek an increase. I know he is talking about seeking an improvement but an improvement might well turn out to be simply a restoration to the 1987 level. Will he seek a real increase in overseas development aid? Furthermore, will he acknowledge that overseas development aid is not money we simply throw away, that it does feed back into our economy in many ways?

The Deputy must wait until such time as the Government give the matter due consideration. Then if the decision arrived at does not please him, he will have an opportunity of a further input in this House.

Top
Share