Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 21 May 1996

Vol. 465 No. 6

Agreement Amending Fourth Lomé Convention: Motion.

Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs (Ms Burton)

I move:

That Dáil Éireann approves the terms of the Agreement Amending the Fourth ACP-EC Convention of Lomé and the Protocol concerning the Accession of Austria, Finland and Sweden to the Convention subsequent to the Enlargement of the European Union, signed in Mauritius on 4 November 1995, together with the related Internal Agreement on the financing of and administration of Community aid, signed in Brussels on 20 December 1995, copies of which have been laid before the Dáil on 15 May 1996.

I am pleased to bring before the House this motion to approve the terms of an Agreement amending the Fourth Lomé Convention.

The Lomé Convention is a framework of partnership and co-operation between the member states of the European Union and 70 countries in Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific. It remains the most comprehensive collective agreement ever adopted between the countries of the north and those of the south. It is probably the best known instrument of Community policy in the field of development co-operation, and it is certainly the most important. As it deals with the concerns of some of the poorest farming communities in the world, I am sorry that Deputies Cowen and O'Keeffe are not here to hear it discussed.

The Fourth Lomé Convention has as its objective "to promote and expand the economic, cultural and social development of the ACP states and to consolidate and diversify the relations between the community and the ACP states in a spirit of solidarity and mutual interest". This objective continues to govern the terms of the agreement signed in Mauritius last November amending the Fourth Lomé Convention which I am commending to the House today.

Unlike earlier conventions designed to cover a five year period, the Fourth Lomé Convention signed in Togo in December 1989, was concluded for a period of ten years. However, the financial Protocol attached to the Convention was limited to an initial five year period with renegotiation to take place at the end of that time. In addition, to provide greater flexibility in the implementation of the Convention, Lomé Four provided that either side could request at the end of this five year period a review of other clauses in the agreement should this prove necessary. It is the outcome of this mid-term review that is before the House today for its approval.

The Fourth Lomé Convention contained strengthened provisions in respect of rural development and food security, and expanded the list of agricultural products free to enter the Community without duty. It also liberated rules of origin for industrial goods and provided financial support to assist structural reform programmes as well as placing enhanced emphasis on preservation of the environment in ACP states. The Convention also contained strengthened provisions on human rights and on the role of women in development.

In summary, the Fourth Lomé Convention contains four essential features: it is a contract, negotiated to last for ten years, between equal partners; it respects each partner's freedom to choose its economic model and political system, subject to specific human rights provisions; it is a comprehensive agreement that combines a range of co-operation instruments; its institutions — ACP-EU Council of Ministers and Committee of Ambassadors and the ACP-EU Joint Assembly — allow for a permanent dialogue between Governments and with the European Parliament.

Without entering into unnecessary detail, I would like to outline to the House the background to the agreement signed last November revising the Fourth Lomé Convention together with its main provisions. It was not intended that the process of review would involve a global negotiation of the Fourth Lomé Convention. Instead, emphasis was placed on a new issues of mutual importance to EU member states and to the ACP partners. During the first five years many momentuous events in world terms had taken place — the end of the Cold War, the transition to democracy in South Africa, the outbreak of war in the former Yugoslavia, to mention a few. In terms of the developments in European and world history, together with the accession of the new states of Austria, Finland and Sweden to the European Union, the review was timely.

The main conclusions of the review fall under four main headings: political, economic, sectoral and financial. I will outline those briefly. In regard to political and institutional issues, one of the most encouraging trends of recent years — something we perhaps register too lightly — is widespread acceptance today that breaches of human rights are the legitimate concern of the entire international community. In the revised Convention, observers of human rights and the rule of law are made mandatory requirements. In practice this means that if human rights principles are violated and if agreed mechanisms of consultation fail, there can be total or partial suspension of the Convention in respect of the state concerned.

In the mid-term, both sides expressed interest in depending political dialogue between the European Union and our ACP partners. The revised Convention now envisages an expansion of political dialogue within the framework of the ACP-EU Council of Ministers as well as at regional level. It also provides for the future accession of South Africa to the Convention without further ratification by the signatories to the Convention.

Despite free access for industrial exports and most agricultural products, the level of ACP exports to the EU has remained at a low level. The ACP share of the EU market declined from 6.7 per cent in 1976 to 3.4 per cent in 1993 while, at the same time, non-ACP countries receiving less preferential treatment performed more successfully. That is something which must be of concern to everybody, particularly in relation to sub-Sarahan Africa.

In the negotiation of the revised convention, the focus of discussion lay for the first time, less on preferential access to EU markets than on developing a sectoral, integrated approach. In this, the seeds for new co-operation arrangements to take account of enhanced globalisation and liberalisation in the international economy have been firmly laid.

In respect of access for ACP products to the Community market, the final agreement arrived at included expansion of the preferential system to cover virtually all products originating in ACP countries. In addition, rules governing origin of goods were relaxed to promote intra-regional trade between the ACP states and their non-ACP neighbours.

The revised convention provides for increased industrial and cultural co-operation as well as explicitly including provisions to favour decentralised co-operation, including through greater financial support. Some changes were also made in the operation of the Stabex system, including that transfers may be used to support reforms in line with agreed structural adjustment efforts.

The European Development Fund — EDF — is the main financing instrument of the Lomé Convention and funds a range of economic and social projects in ACP countries. European Development Funds are made up of ad hoc contributions by the EU member states and are not included in the Union budget.

The 8th EDF — which will not come into force until the revised convention has been ratified — was perhaps the most difficult area of negotiations in the mid-term review. At the European Council meeting in Cannes in June 1995, an offer of ECU 13.3 billion was made to ACP countries and this was subsequently accepted. This represents an increase of 22 per cent in ECU terms vis-à-vis the 7th EDF applying in the first five years of Lomé IV.

Ireland's share of the 8th EDF will be 80 million ECU or approximately £64 million. This compares to 60 million ECU or approximately £50 million for the 7th EDF.

Payments by member states to the EDF are made four times each year. In 1995, Ireland's payment amounted to £7.3 million as against an estimate of £7.8 million. For technical reasons, the implementation cycle of an EDF lasts longer than the five-year period of the relevant convention, and annual payments to the fund can vary somewhat from year to year.

On 20 December 1995, the Government signed an internal EU agreement on the financing and administration of Community aid under the 8th EDF. This agreement lays down procedures for the programming and approval of aid and rules governing the disbursement of funds.

Ireland has enjoyed a reasonable track record in receiving contracts awarded under previous EDFs. However, I would like to see this figure increase during the 8th EDF and will actively pursue how best this can be achieved.

I recognise there is some disappointment among ACP countries that the total for the 8th EDF was not fixed at a higher level. Nonetheless, the compromise figure agreed is a reasonable one and will enable project assistance to continue at a level equal to that of recent years.

EU objectives and priorities for financial disbursements are explicitly stated in the Declaration annexed to the revised convention. These objectives include sustainable economic and social development, poverty alleviation and respect for human rights and fundamental liberties.

In relation to the European Investment Bank, the revised convention provides that the EIB will give each ACP country an overall indication of the specific resources and venture capital it can expect to receive during the five-year period covered by the second financial Protocol.

In recent years, Ireland's Development Co-operation budget has increased dramatically. This year it amounts to £106 million or .29 per cent of GNP, the highest ever total. Inevitably, this increase has focused mainly on expansion of our bilateral aid budget and on targeting countries such as Zaire and Tanzania. This is as it should be. I have no doubt this trend is warmly supported by the overwhelming majority of this House.

Nonetheless our aid policy must also focus on the multilateral aspects of development policy. Our role in the Lomé Convention is an important dimension of that policy just as our contribution to the EDF is a significant portion of our Development Co-operation budget.

Around the world today, the concept and practice of development co-operation is under appraisal and re-definition as never before. I do not need to tell Members that many countries suffer from declining aid budgets, sometimes referred to as "donor fatigue".

A few weeks ago, the members of the Development Assistance Committee — DAC — of the OECD — including Ireland — issued a statement of rededication and commitment to the goals of Development Co-operation over the coming years. I propose to place a copy of this statement in the library of the House for the information of Members.

Nonetheless, it is fair to say there is today greater apprehension among developing countries regarding the future of development co-operation than perhaps every before, particularly when one talks not just about development issues but about the equally important ones of trade and debt.

Economic developments in recent years have led to increased disparities between countries able to take advantage of changes in the global economy and those finding themselves facing increased marginalisation. The internationalisation of technology and investment has already profoundly affected least developed countries. The competition for markets is today harder than ever before. Many developing countries — especially in Africa — experience continuing negative growth because of reliance on a small primary commodity base, poor infrastructure, high indebtedness, or weak technological capacities.

It seems to me axiomatic that, for most developing counties, trade is increasingly the key issue that will determine whether they can achieve the economic growth needed to combat poverty. Development co-operation assistance will continue to be essential for such countries but it provides no substitute for economic self-capacity and growth.

Establishing conditions for economic growth is not only a matter of developing an adequate domestic production structure. It also requires establishing good governmental and administrative structures which facilitate industrial and commercial development.

Growth in world trade is likely to be robust over the coming decade as a result of the Uruguay Round trade liberalisation. It is now incumbent on the developed world to ensure that least developed countries do not become the losers in this process. Inevitably, some developing countries will suffer an erosion of tariff preferences in their export markets. Agricultural liberalisation in the industrialised countries may also lead to a rise in world food prices which will have a net adverse effect on the trade patterns of least developed countries. It is necessary that the international community does all in its power to ensure that developing countries are given full opportunity to take advantage of the opportunities presented by global economic liberalisation.

In the coming years, the decisive debate of our time will relate to development co-operation and on how, to paraphrase D'Israeli's phrase about two nations we can move to bridge the increasing gulf between two worlds that share one world.

We in Ireland can and must play our part in this debate, not least by making steady progress in our Development Co-operation budget to the UN goal of 0.7 per cent of GNP. This is important but it is not enough. We must also become increasingly active participants in the international debate on development co-operation in all its aspects: how to increase economic and social development for poor countries and population groups; how to establish conditions for greater participation by least developed countries in the global economy; how to safeguard the international environment; how to promote peace, reconciliation and respect for human rights as essential goals in their own right but also as preconditions for economic and social development.

Development co-operation policy today must relate not only to financial transfers but increasingly to a range of political, economic and social issues. I am determined that Ireland will play its full part in the debate now taking place on how to bridge the growing barriers between developed and developing countries.

The Lomé Convention is a framework of co-operation that has served its purpose well. The agreement revising the Convention I am recommending to the House today will make its provisions even more flexible and responsive to the needs of the ACP countries in the remaining five-year life span.

Inevitably, debate will now take place on the shape of future EU-ACP relations when the current convention lapses in the year 2000. The European Commission will table a Green Paper on this issue later this year. I hope this debate can be opened at the Development Council to be held next November during the Irish Presidency.

This debate will be of critical importance for the future of EU Development Co-operation policy. Inevitably, there will be substantive changes in any successor Lomé framework that must take account, for example, of the impact of WTO rules on preferential imports from ACP countries to the EU. It is already clear that the declining EU market share held by the ACP states requires an assessment of non-tariff barriers to trade.

The debate on the future of Lomé must be conducted in a spirit of partnership and openness. That it how the Irish Presidency will approach this important subject in the second half of this year.

In the debate on Post-Lomé arrangements, Ireland will emphasise our view that the position of the poorest countries in Sub-Saharan Africa must be protected. We will be open as to precise options but we will not be flexible on this fundamental policy position. We in Europe cannot continue to see Africa become poorer and more marginalised.

The revised Lomé Convention strengthens EU-ACP relations and improves the effectiveness of our co-operation and partnership. I commend this motion to the House.

Mr. R. Burke

In November 1995 Ministers from each of the member states of the European Union gathered in Mauritius, with representatives from an additional 70 countries for the purposes of formally renewing the trade and aid pact which has linked Europe and some European countries with its former colonies.

Backtracking a number of decades, Lomé I was concluded in February 1975 and at that time 46 African. Caribbean and Pacific states and the then nine member states of the European Community came together in the capital of Togo to sign the Lomé document which was the result of many months of negotiations. Since its inception just over 20 years ago, many factors on the political and economic horizon have evolved. The Lomé Convention has not, of course, been immune from the rapid changes the world has witnessed. Lomé has been influenced by changing balances of power, and by evolving political and economic thinking. The Uruguay Round negotiations, the changing face of the former Eastern Bloc, world economic recessions and the implications of trade trends on developing countries have all made their imprint on the various Lomé Conventions that have been renewed and revised since its inauguration in 1975.

The agreement on the revised Lomé IV Convention was signed at the Mahatma Gandhi Institute in Mauritius on 4 November 1995. Foreign and development Ministers from the 15 EU states and 69 of the 70 African, Caribbean and Pacific (APC) countries were present at the signing. The absentee was Somalia, a country which has not yet ratified Lomé IV. South Africa, a country which may soom be a member of the convention, was an observer at that meeting.

Revising the Lomé IV Convention took over 15 months, with negotiations overshadowed by a bitter squabble between EU countries over the size of their contributions to the aid budget. Britain, in fact, wanted to slash its aid budget by upwards of 30 per cent. The meeting in Mauritius certainly provided the opportunity for delegations to begin dialogue on a matter of concern to all signatories, that is the future of the Lomé Convention itself.

What does Lomé IV mean? As the Minister of State said it is a convention that among other factors, includes provision for trade co-operation, stabilisation of export earnings from commodities, industrial co-operation and financial and technical assistance. Lomé IV has a life span of ten years from 1 March 1990 to the year 2000. On 1 March 1995 a financial Protocol which allows for the EU funding of the European Development Fund (EDF) to give effect to the Lomé Convention was due for renewal. The share taken by Ireland of the eight EDF which was incorporated in a new financial Protocol means that Ireland will fund the EDF to a level of 80 million ECU, approximately £64 million, for the five year period 1995-2000. This represents approximately a 0.6 per cent of total funding. While Ireland increased her aid by almost one quarter, Germany, Britain and the Netherlands refused any real increase.

As mentioned by the Minister of State our funding of the EDF entitles Ireland to compete for contracts which derives from the disbursement of the EDF aid. The value of contracts awarded to Ireland is more than the rate of contribution to the EDF. Apart from the financial Protocol, a Protocol to the reviewed Lomé Convention was signed in Mauritius, which provide for the accession to the convention of the three new EU member states, namely Austria, Finland and Sweden.

It is important to note that at the Mauritius meeting the ACP countries accepted a critical clause which enables the EU to suspend aid when Article 5 of the convention covering respect for human rights, democracy and the rule of law is breached. I place particular significance on that.

In a brief speech to the Mauritius gathering, the EU Council President while recognising the debates on the future of Lomé that lie ahead stressed the symbolic value of ACP-EU co-operation. It is, he stated "a unique model in the world of international co-operation" and "proof of commitment" on the part of Europe to live in harmony in the world. Acknowledging the sentiments expressed by Mr. Solana, it is important that Ireland contributes constructively and effectively to debates which will ensue on both the future and on the further direction of the Lomé Convention.

As I noted earlier the revised Lomé Convention sees its term end in March 2000. The EU Commission has already indicated that it aims to publish a Green Paper towards the end of the current year on possible options for the future of ACP-EU relations. Fianna Fáil believes it is critical that there is a comprehensive debate on the direction of the Lomé Convention. It cannot be ignored that while 69 of the 70 signatories of the Lomé Convention signed the Mauritius agreement at the end of last year, it undoubtedly was signed amid fears that it certainly might not last beyond the year 2000, when the convention expires. Certainly as the EU turns its eyes in the direction of Eastern Europe the relationship between the ACP-EU countries will come under strain. Yet we believe that, recognising global political changes and altered regional policies, the Lomé Convention must be judged positively.

The benefits of Lomé must be judged positively but have they been properly articulated? Certainly to date they have not. To rectify this at the 20th session of the ACP-EU Assembly in January 1995 a joint declaration known as the Dakar Plan of Action was proposed and adopted. The plan of actions stressed the need to "highlight the achievements of the Convention" and to "identify the main bottlenecks to successful co-operation". The plan proposes that the best way to answer critics is for the bottlenecks to be addressed.

As some of the EU member states appear to be looking away from Lomé members' interest, what do the ACP countries think? Without a doubt the level of development assistance on offer under the Lomé Convention has been less than they had hoped for during the years. Yet despite this, each new agreement witnessed an increase in real terms in the financial resources that have been made available, the recent financial Protocol being the exception. This time funding has not gone up in real terms although the nominal amount has risen by 22 per cent in line with inflation. From the point of view of the ACP countries, the Lomé Convention has provided a partnership of stability and reliability during the past 20 years.

Ireland has a role and must continue to maintain it in striving to ensure that this partnership of stability and reliability does not expire. As I stated in our policy document on Foreign Affairs published last November "Our Place in the World", Ireland has long enjoyed a particular affinity and credibility with the countries of the developing world. Our standing owes much to our non-colonial past, our famine history and the contribution of thousands of Irish people, both missionaries and lay development workers, who have worked on development projects and humanitarian relief operations in many parts of the world.

While recognising the level of funding Ireland contributes to the EDF, we believe that it can and should play a greater role as a voice for the Third World in the chambers and corridors of power in Europe and throughout the world.

We assume the EU Presidency in a number of weeks. The Government must ensure that it fully utilises every opportunity to promote the legitimate needs of developing nations. The EU cannot abandon the ACP countries. We should not stand for such dereliction of duty. Among other factors, Ireland must support the call for a world conference on Third World debt during which the World Bank, the IMF and the regional development banks would focus on the issue of Third World indebtedness.

In approving the motion before the House today, I call on the Government to place the issue of ACP nations and the developing world high on the EU Presidency agenda. The ACP-EU relationship cannot and should not be let die due to a lack of a comprehensive debate. The debate should begin in earnest in Dublin in the summer of 1996.

Mr. O'Malley

I am happy to support this motion to approve of the amendments made in Mauritius, the Protocol signed there and the subsequent internal agreement made in Brussels on 20 December last. The changes made are not enormous and nobody could object to them.

Two points arise from what the Minister of State said. She said that the ACP share of the EU market declined from 6.7 per cent in 1976 to 3.4 per cent in 1993 whild at the same time non-ACP countries receiving less preferential treatment performed more successfully. That sums up a good deal of what is wrong with the EU's efforts to help some of the weaker countries. It is frightening that the developing countries' share of the EU market should have been halved in percentage terms in 17 years. I accept that the EU market expanded a great deal during that time and, undoubtedly, in cash terms the developing countries' share of its increased, but it is a distressing that their share of it halved in percentage terms.

A realisation of why that is happening was indicated by the Minister of State when she said that many developing countries, especially in Africa, experience continuing negative growth because of reliance on a small primary commodity base, poor infrastructure, high indebtedness or weak technological capacity. The Minister implied that they suffer possibly from one or other impediment, but many of them suffer from all four. That is why their share of an enlarging and increasingly competitive European market is continually declining and it is becoming more difficult for them to get a share or maintain their existing share of that market. It is distressing this should be the case not merely in a small number but in so many African countries.

In spite of all the problems in Eastern Europe, its unhappy political history and its long affliction with communism, the standard of living even in what we consider the most backward countries bears no comparison with the standard of living in Africa. Those Eastern European countries are light years ahead of the subsistence or sub-subsistence existence that operates in so many parts of Africa. Offhand I can think of only three Asian countries, North Korea, Laos and Burma, with a very low standard of living and that has occurred because of political reasons. Apart from those countries Asia appears to be able to look after itself very much better than Africa and I am not sure whether that can be attributed to climatic or other reasons. Africa should be the focus of our attention and concern. While South and Central America are experiencing some problems, they are many steps ahead of Africa in standard of living terms.

The Minister of State said that it seems axiomatic that for most developing countries trade is increasingly the key issue that will determine whether they can achieve the necessary economic growth to combat poverty. I am not sure what she intended the words "trade" to cover, but I presume she meant trade in industrial and agricultural goods. I would have thought that the best development opportunities open to many of those countries in the short-term is not through trade because many of them do not have anything and more of them have only commodities to trade. In that regard they are in an impossible position as world commodity prices are extremely low. I would have thought that in the short-term tourism offers many of them an opportunity to develop, but the great majority of them lack the necessary infrastructure. The main difference between Kenya and Tanzania, two adjoining countries in equatorial Africa, is that Kenya has a relatively vibrant tourist trade and Tanzania has none and that makes a major difference to the two countries. If Tanzania's initial tourism development could be intensively encouraged over two or three years, it could make a substantial difference to countries like it.

Given that standards of health and education are very low in many African countries, nearly all of them suffer from the major drawback of a rapidly increasing population. Unlike the provision of some other infrastructures, the cost of providing health or education infrastructure bears a ratio to population size. If the population can be maintained at a reasonably steady level or increases at only a moderate rate, some control can be exercised over necessary health and education costs. The doubling of population every 12 to 15 years in some countries is making it difficult for them to maintain existing levels of education and health care.

A debate is needed on ensuring that an effective from of assistance is given to developing countries in the future. The absence of tariffs is not enough. That will be found to be increasingly the case irrespective of the influence of the Uruguay Round. Something much more proactive than merely the almost total absence of tariffs must be devised and that matter must be addressed carefully.

I am delighted to see from the history of earlier Lomé conventions that virtually all loans have been converted into donations. This is only correct and I presume it will happen under the Fourth Convention — I hope it happened under the first half of the convention; I regard this as Lomé four, mark two. It was wrong that the Fourth Lomé Convention was signed for a ten year period. If it had been for a five year period like the earlier conventions it might have been better. Things are changing rapidly and it is frightening to think that in the currency of the Fourth Lomé Convention many recipient states are becoming poorer in absolute terms and much poorer relative to other donor states or more developed countries. This is a very serious matter. If during the Irish Presidency a debate can be initiated on the reality of the problems facing these countries and the anxieties of the developed world to aid them, then we will have to ensure that other ways of helping them are devised and the traditional ways are recognised as inadequate and as no longer working. This is a challenge which faces all of us.

In talking about EU-ACP relations and the aid given since 1975 under successive Lomé conventions we have to realise this is a relatively small proportion of overall aid and assistance of different kinds, particularly loans and investments. Unfortunately some institutions have not been as generous as the EU in writing off their former assistance, particularly loans. Admittedly, the European Union figures are much smaller than those of many other institutions but it is appalling to look at those African countries where the servicing of debt annually is far and away the biggest annual outgoing. In many of those countries the servicing of debt, not to mention the repayment of it, is much greater than the combined spending on health and education. This is happening in countries where the life expectancy is as low as 40 or 45 years, the rate of illiteracy is often as high as 70-80 per cent and the needs are enormous. Yet huge proportions of the very limited hard currency earnings made by these countries are devoted to the repayment of interest on debt and in some cases to repay some small parts of the debt. It is increasingly impossible for many of those countries to meet these repayments and this should be recognised by all concerned.

I would like to think the fifth Lomé convention will be more fundamental than the previous conventions, will take account of experience arising from them and will be greater in magnitude and effect. It should be got across to the authorities of as many of these countries as possible that it is desirable for some control to be maintained over the extraordinary rate of increase in population in many of these countries which is compounding an already difficult problem.

Mr. Ferris

This motion relates to the workings of my committee which fully supports the effort of the Minister in bringing the Agreement before the House for ratification. On the Order of Business, what needs to be done was referred to, but the reality is that if we do not pass this motion all the work on the Protocol signed on our behalf last November, will be set at nought.

The convention deals specifically with farming problems in the countries listed. It also includes provision for trade co-operation, the stabilisation of export earnings from commodities, industrial co-operation and financial and technical assistance. It is pleasing to note that under the convention, which is intended to run to the end of the year 2000, Ireland's contribution will be increased from 60 million ECU under the seventh European development fund to be more than 80 million ECU. This compares favourably with the contribution by some of the wealthier members of the EU. I commend the Minister, Government and Tánaiste for their continuing efforts to ensure that our share of overseas development aid will continue to be increased within the scarce resources available to us, while all the time trying to meet the UN requirement of 0.7 per cent of GNP. This matter has been discussed at length by the sub-committee of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs and I am sure its chairman, Deputy Pat Gallagher, shares the Minister's view that while making a contribution of £107 million we must also use our influence to ensure that the problem of the crippling debts of poor nations is addressed.

Under the convention members will be able to transform into donations some of the special loans granted under previous conventions. I was interested to note that under the last convention 15 million ECU were transferred into special loans, 150 million ECU were not allocated under previous European development funds and 142 million ECU were not utilised under the seventh fund. We want to do everything possible to assist these countries — Ireland has led the way in this respect — and I would like to know why these funds cannot be drawn down and used for some of the purposes outlined by the Minister.

The convention provides that aid can be suspended in cases of violations of Article 5 of the Convention on Human Rights, democracy and the rule of law. We must ensure that aid is allocated to the right places and people, that it is used as efficiently as possible and that recipient countries comply with international law. I am pleased a recommendation has been made that South Africa be added to the list of signatories to the convention. I anticipate the House's approval for the convention, which confirms Ireland's commitment to overseas development aid, and I welcome that move.

Mr. M. Kitt

I also welcome the revision of the Fourth Lomé Convention. The Minister referred to the new, difficult and complex challenges we face and it is important we move, as best we can, to provide for the measures in the convention. The conflicts and famines in Africa and the war in the former Yugoslavia showed us the harsh realities of the problems facing the people in these countries, but there have also been political breakthroughs in Mozambique and South Africa.

I hope the convention will address the issue of human rights. The Minister referred to the observance of human rights and the rule of law and observed that these are mandatory requirements. If any human rights principles are violated, the convention could be partly or totally suspended in respect of the states concerned.

My first worry relates to the ACP share of the EU market which declined from 6.7 per cent in 1976 to 3.4 per cent in 1993. This issue was highlighted recently when representatives of the fair trade association referred to the problems it encounters securing markets and those experienced by people involved in the fair trade of bananas. I am sure the Minister wants progress in this area.

Deputy Burke referred to the sad fact that the poorest countries are repaying more money than they are receiving in development assistance. I support the Deputy's call for a world conference on Third World debt to secure a once off write off of the debts of the countries most seriously affected. At the same time some EU countries are supplying armaments to poor countries and this enables conflict which often arises in these countries to continue. I am glad the Government is taking the issue of landmines seriously. Much progress has been made on that matter, but a large number of EU countries and other continue to supply arms. Ireland must use its influence — it has done so in the past and can do so in the future — to ensure an end is put to this once and for all.

The revised convention provides that the European Investment Bank will give each ACP country an overall indication of the specific resources and venture capital it can expect to receive during the five-year period covered by the second financial Protocol. This is most welcome. It is a good idea to indicate the specific resources available.

Regarding Ireland's policy, to which I referred at a committee meeting recently, I welcome the increase to £106 million, or 0.29 per cent of GNP. Some NGOs have expressed concern about the growth path of the increase. The Irish aid strategy plan envisaged a growth path of 0.05 per cent and if that was met, the figure would be 0.35 per cent of GNP in 1996. Perhaps the Minister of State will refer to this aspect in her reply.

The economy has done well and perhaps this is why we have neglected to meet our aid plan target. This happens when economies are sucessful, but it was intended that the aid growth targets would accommodate changing national circumstances. This has not taken place and this is the only criticism I have regarding the percentage of GNP. Perhaps the Minister of State will outline when the Government hopes to reach the 0.7 per cent level if the growth path is not as good as anticipated.

Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs (Ms Burton)

I thank Deputies for their supportive comments in relation to the Irish aid programme. In the context of Ireland's forthcoming Presidency of the European Union, I recall a remark made by Mr. Jacques Delors in his last year as president of the Union. He said that if Europe did not have a soul, it was about nothing. In many ways the test of whether the European Union has more to it than trade agreements and the liberalisation of trading capital, if it has a soul and is about people, is its relationship with the poorest countries in the world, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa.

As Deputy Burke said, the Lomé Convention arose from the traditional relationships between some European countries, particularly France and Britain, and their former colonies. Although they have been unsatisfactory in certain respects, the Lomé agreements have served as a benchmark of stability and co-operation. They set down a marker in relation to Europe's continuing concern for less developed countries in the world.

We face a changed world involving extraordinary liberalisation of trade and this will give rise to enormous problems for the poorest countries. Deputy Ferris and Deputy O'Malley referred to the difficulties and Deputy Kitt mentioned the decline in the share of trade which ACP countries enjoy in terms of their participation in the European market. This has reduced by almost a half over the period and people talk about parts of Africa experiencing an accelerated decline. If we are to stop that, we must examine carefully the recent history of Africa. A number of crises have engulfed countries such as Ethiopia, Somalia, Rwanda and Burundi. Unfortunately, in all these crises we can identify large elements which could have been prevented if early action had been taken in relation to human rights and the protection and growth of democracy or alleviating food shortages and droughts when they occurred.

As we move towards a new Lomé agreement and a Green Paper, the Irish position should focus on the poorest countries covered by the agreement, those in Sub-Saharan Africa. We should make this central point during the review process. We need to look at the content of the Lomé agreement and, rather than paint with a broad brush, concentrate on the impact a future agreement may have on different regions of the world under specific headings. When they held the Presidency of the European Union the Spanish, understandably, paid special attention to South America, the Germans focused on Eastern Europe while the French and the Spanish, focused on the relationship with the countries of the Mediterranean Basin and the Maghreb. It is appropriate, in terms of international policy that Ireland, because of its connections through its missionaries, NGOs and aid programme, should focus on Africa. I am afraid that in the new round of world trade agreements it may be left out and the depressing statistic I read out of a reduction in its share of the European Union market may become worse.

Deputy O'Malley referred to the potential of the tourism industry to generate significant revenues. In theory, it has potential but many countries in Africa lack the capacity to generate large scale revenues from it because of poor infrastructure and because many diseases, such as malaria, which are treatable, are rampant. The result is that many tourists are increasingly fearful of travelling on holiday of relatively short duration to areas where there is a significant risk of catching a serious disease. We must address these realities.

Above all, we must address in a comprehensive way the related issues of trade and debt. As Deputy Bruke said, in the debates which took place at the Development Council in settling the eighth round of the EDF many countries, particularly Germany and Great Britain, expressed difficulty with increasing aid envelopes to developing countries under the EU budget. They expressed a preference for bilateral aid which they considered more efficient and better targeted. That is a point we also need to consider.

Deputy Ferris asked what happened to the underspent in earlier rounds of the EDF. Some are continuing and taking longer than originally planned. In our case we have secured the permission of the Minister for Finance to reallocate any funds which remain unspent to the NGO co-financing element or other elements of the aid budget.

I thank the Deputies who contributed to the debate which marks the ending of the review process on the Fourth Lomé agreement. It also marks the opening of the debate on the next agreement which in many ways will determine the relationship between Europe and sub-Saharan Africa in particular over the next century.

Question put and agreed to.