Vol. 395 No. 4
11 Mr. Moynihan asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs the value in 1989 of the imports of Polish coal; the expected value in 1990; whether he has any proposals for unilateral economic aid to Poland; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
69 Mr. T. O'Sullivan asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if he has any proposals for making unilateral aid available to any Eastern European country; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
90 Mrs. Owen asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs the amount of money which was allocated to Romania by this Government; and the Estimate from which the money came.
92 Mrs. Owen asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs the money which has been allocated to Poland in the last year; and the source of such money.
93 Mrs. Owen asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if any money has been allocated to East Germany in the past few months; if so, the amount; and the source.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 11, 69, 90, 92 and 93 together. In 1989 total Polish coal imports amounted to approximately 606,000 tonnes with a value of IR£41.5 million. In 1990 we expect that these figures will be more than halved in view of the introduction of the controls announced by the Minister for the Environment on 26 January 1990 for the Dublin area.
In relation to bilateral aid to Eastern Europe, the Government has made available a special provision of IR£650,000 for 1990 for bilateral aid projects in Poland and Hungary. These funds have been added to the Bilateral Aid Fund under the Fund for International Co-operation. In addition, the Government will contribute their share of the European Communities programme of assistance to Poland and Hungary. We have already disbursed some of the bilateral aid and I expect to make further allocations shortly in the light of identified needs in these countries. In addition, the Government allocated IR£100,000 for disaster relief for Romania in the aftermath of the December revolution there. This was provided to the Irish Red Cross for the purchase of medical supplies, and has been paid from the disaster relief fund. No funds have been allocated for East Germany.
Could the Minister clarify for the House the budget from which the money that went to Poland, Romania and East Germany came? The Minister referred to a special provision of IR£650,000 but where was provision made for this in the Estimates? Would the Minister confirm that the aid of £100,000 to Romania actually came from the emergency aid budget for our overseas development programme and would he not agree with me that this allocation should have come from elsewhere than the already depleted overseas development fund?
The allocation of economic assistance for Poland and Hungary was a special extra allocation made by the Government in the 1990 Estimates. The provision of disaster relief for Romania was made from the 1990 allocation for disaster relief. Normally such funds are used for developing countries, but the disaster relief fund is not specifically tied to use in these countries only. Amounts provided to non-developing countries are excluded from the calculation of the official development assistance.
Would the Minister not agree that aid to countries in Eastern Europe was not borne in mind when our development aid budget was announced in November 1989? Would he not further agree that it is wrong of him to imply that the money was there for Eastern European countries when in fact it was set aside for countries with whom we have bilateral arrangements and other developing countries in the Third World and not Second World countries like Poland and Romania?
I am sure Members of the House will agree that there was a need to come to the aid of Romania at the particular time we did——
I do not deny that.
——and the method used by the Government to provide this aid was as I described it.
Will you be replacing it?
Would the Minister agree that there is considerable concern that there will be a shift of resources away from aid for developing countries in the Third World to Eastern Europe? Would he agree it is important that such fears be allayed by his giving the House a categoric assurance that that will not happen, at least in relation to Irish aid and in regard to his influence within the European Community? By way of an additional supplementary would the Minister say whether there are any conditions attached to Ireland's aid to Eastern Europe?
The answer to the first part of the Deputy's supplementary question is "yes"; there is and has been concern among Community members, among the membership of the ACP, among the Mediterranean group of countries, that Community funds would be diverted from these areas to Central and Eastern Europe. Efforts have been made to try to allay that concern. Indeed, one Member of this House who was present up to a few minutes ago — Deputy Garland — raised that issue this morning at a meeting chaired by Deputy Barry, that is the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Secondary Legislation of the EC. There I was able to say that it is certainly not the intention of the Community — and I think Deputy De Rossa was present in the European Parliament when President Jacques Delors said something similar — that this would happen. In fact moneys already provided by the Community will not interfere in any way with the allocations agreed to the ACP or to any of the other obligations the Community must honour. On a bilateral basis I readily understand Members' concern, even taking into account the low level of our contributions in this area — I think this matter appears on the Order Paper for later today but I accept readily that we should not weaken our position with regard to our bilateral aid. The only mechanism available to us at the particular time to meet the request for immediate aid — this answers the latter part of Deputy De Rossa's supplementary question — of a humanitarian nature was the only one available to us in our endeavour to help out in those circumstances. I presume Deputy De Rossa means that there would be certain conditions attached to Community aid generally, that is Community aid to some of the developing countries in Central and Eastern Europe, that they must be countries that show clearly they are on the path to a market-orientated economy, that they are on the road to a multiparty electoral system——
I think one gets points for that, if one is on the road to a market-orientated economy. Being on the road to implementing human rights is another matter.
Of course human rights constitute another important element. These are the requirements that have to be met and will be essential to the allocation of the type of aid Deputy De Rossa has in mind.
Does the Minister not think it somewhat odd that we are giving aid to Poland — which I am glad to support — while at the same time another arm of Government is introducing a measure which will damage their economy because coal constitutes one of their major currency earners? Would the Minister agree that many people would subscribe to the view that it is damaging the least well off in our own country and that there is a contradiction between all of these elements which should be resolved?
I accept the logic of the point made by Deputy Barry. When I suggested some five or ten minutes ago that Dublin be considered a possible location for the environmental agency there was a titter from certain benches, obviously because of the smog with which we have to deal. I accept that. Some Members might regard those proposed measures as not sufficient but they constitute a very good start.
That was not the point I was making.
I am coming to it. Coal imports from Poland obviously play a major part in the smog with which we must contend. Of course, if we reduce our imports of coal from Poland by 50 per cent, as is envisaged by the Department of the Environment, that will have a very serious effect on the Polish economy. Therefore, one may well ask if there is any alternative.
A little deeper thought about the matter might not go astray.
In view of the Minister's reply that he now has much more call on the European budget can he give the House an assurance that he will restore the £1 million taken in last week's budget from the ODA fund — announced in the Estimates in November 1989 — £1 million not required for assistance to the EC Lomé Fund? Can he now give the House an assurance that he will immediately restore that money to the ODA fund because, in reply to a parliamentary question on 23 November last, the Minister made big play of the fact that the budget was £0.9 million over 1989 whereas now it is £200,000 less than 1989?
The Deputy is expanding the scope of this question altogether.
I agree with the Deputy and very much wish that I could but I cannot say that. As the Deputy knows full well, it is a matter for Government. Nevertheless I can say that the matter will be brought to the attention of Government.
