Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 10 Nov 2005

Vol. 609 No. 5

Priority Questions.

Undocumented Irish.

Bernard Allen

Question:

1 Mr. Allen asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs the recent contact that he has had with the administration of the United States of America concerning the difficulties faced by the undocumented Irish there; the efforts being taken by the Government to assist these undocumented Irish; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [33560/05]

Finian McGrath

Question:

3 Mr. F. McGrath asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs the position regarding undocumented Irish in the USA; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [33720/05]

I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 and 3 together.

Immigration has become a highly sensitive and divisive issue in the United States since the tragic events of 11 September 2001. As a result, the position of our undocumented citizens in the US has become progressively more difficult. The quality of daily life for those affected has worsened with constant stress and anxiety as well as sadness at the inability of the undocumented to return temporarily to Ireland in the event of bereavement or serious illness of a relative or for other family occasions such as weddings.

As the House is aware, the issue of the undocumented and the difficulties they face are matters of the highest priority for the Government. In all our contacts with political leaders of the United States, including when the Taoiseach and I met President Bush earlier in the year, we have emphasised the importance of addressing this issue in a positive and sympathetic way.

On my visit to New York and Boston last week, I again stressed the high priority the Government attaches to the issue and to resolving it as soon as possible. To intensify our efforts further, which includes intensive ongoing lobbying by our ambassador and the embassy, I will visit Washington later this month for a series of meetings where I will once more strongly underline the priority which the Government attaches to securing the desired reforms.

I also express the Government's appreciation of the all-party support for the Government's efforts on behalf of the undocumented. Many Members of the Oireachtas, including the Ceann Comhairle and Deputy Kenny, have given generously of their time to this important issue. The consensus in the Oireachtas was clearly demonstrated by the contribution of colleagues in both Houses during the debate on the all-party motions last month. I have conveyed these motions to the United States administration and to key players on Capitol Hill, including to Senators Kennedy and McCain.

The legislative debate in Washington DC is entering a critical phase with various proposals under consideration, including the Bill jointly sponsored by Senators McCain and Kennedy. If this Bill were adopted in its present form, it would provide a path to permanent residency and, as a result, enable the undocumented to participate in the life of their adopted country free from fear and uncertainty. The Government strongly supports this Bill and I have instructed the embassy and consulates to intensify their lobbying in support of it.

In addition to my commitment to try to advance the interests of the undocumented through legislative reform, I recently announced grants to Irish immigration centres in the US totalling $815,000. This represented an increase of 40% on last year. Any Irish person in the US in need of guidance and support at this complex time of change should approach one of these excellent centres. They provide a range of invaluable information and advisory services, and we warmly appreciate their work. While in New York last week, I again had the opportunity to see their work at first hand and to convey our deep appreciation for it, as I know many Deputies on all sides have also done.

My party is vigorous in its approach to the Bills before the Senate and the House of Representatives at present. The Minister referred to Deputy Kenny who was lobbying strongly in the United States last weekend. Deputy Connaughton led a group of Fine Gael Deputies to the United States earlier this year. We believe up to 50,000 undocumented Irish fear being involved in a minor breach of the law, consequently being sent home and branded as criminals. This fear should not exist. Does the Minister agree these people have contributed enormously to the economy of the United States and should be recognised for this?

Having had discussions with the authorities in the United States, is the Minister optimistic the Kennedy-McCain and Colby Bills will pass the judicial committee, the House of Representatives and the Senate?

I acknowledge the work Deputy Allen's party and all parties have done on this. The Kennedy-McCain Bills are on one side of the spectrum and other proposals exist on the other side of the spectrum, which are very restrictive. In recent times the United States administration has made suggestions on how this matter might be addressed. President Bush has not commented specifically on this other than to state that if increased enforcement is introduced, the large number of undocumented workers must be dealt with.

The undocumented Irish may account for between 25,000 and 50,000 of a total of approximately 11 million affected, and this includes many nationalities. Suggestions from the administration have not included past permanent residency and I fear that unless some concession is made on the issue of permanent residency, the undocumented people will not come forward. They will fear that if they are granted a temporary six-year visa, the authorities will know where they are when the visa expires. We are not dictating to the authorities of the United States but we must articulate the views of our people. Unless this matter is dealt with in a way that encourages people to come forward willingly, it will not be a success.

I have asked the embassy and consulate in the United States to give this top priority over the next few months. There is a window of opportunity, particularly in the new year, and after that the United States will be in election mode. At that stage, this matter will not be dealt with in a rational manner.

The Minister has the full support of the Independent Deputies. Does he have the figure for undocumented Irish in the United States? Today we heard a reference to 50,000 but I have heard figures as high as 80,000 to 100,000 and as low as 15,000 to 20,000. Does the Minister find it unacceptable that Irish citizens in the United States cannot travel home for family events such as weddings, funerals and Christmas? This causes extreme hardship to many families in Ireland.

Does the Minister accept that these people make a major contribution to the economy and society of the United States? We have a cross-party obligation to support them. I commend the politicians in the United States who support this legislation and I urge the Minister to continue to lobby. Any assistance that can be given to the immigration centres should be supported.

Does the Minister find it strange to fight for the rights of our undocumented citizens in the United States when immigrants are being hounded out of this country? Does he feel uncomfortable about this?

That is a separate issue.

I ask the Minister to be more proactive in dealing with the undocumented Irish in the United States, particularly in defending their rights and protecting Irish citizens abroad. This is a very important issue. Recently the Minister was active in the case of Mr. Rory Carroll.

Defending the rights of Irish citizens abroad is part of the remit of my Department. There is nothing more I can do to defend the rights of undocumented Irish in the United States. I have been in the United States six times in the past nine months, albeit on other business on some occasions but I raised the issue of the undocumented Irish every time. Last week, I had a meeting with former President Bill Clinton on overseas development aid issues and the role of the Clinton Foundation. My colleague, the Minister of State, Deputy Conor Lenihan, is undertaking such work with the former US President in Mozambique. I raised the issue of undocumented Irish people in America with Mr. Clinton and received an undertaking that he would use his influence in whatever way he could in this regard.

On one of my previous visits to America I met a person who had obtained a green card and works with a computer company in an immigration centre in Boston. He suggested we should create a database of Irish people who find themselves in this situation. I suggested in turn that we would provide funding for the compilation of such a database. Most of the immigration centres said it was not feasible, however, because people would not come forward fearing they might be pinpointed in future. I accept that argument. The figure for undocumented Irish people in America is somewhere in the region of 25,000 to 50,000 at the outer limit. The US Administration says it is approximately 5,000 but we believe there are 5,000 alone in a city such as San Francisco.

This issue runs across party lines in the Oireachtas and involves all Members, including Independent Deputies. In our constituency offices we come across families who say their sons or daughters cannot come home for an important life event.

That causes grave concern. I accept that such people contribute greatly to the US economy, as undocumented people generally do. Those who argue against the Kennedy-McCain measure, suggest that the 11 million undocumented people must return whence they came in order to apply for legal resident status. That is a totally impractical suggestion, however, because the US economy could not deal with it. Proposals that do not include a path to legal residency are delaying the problem for another three to six years, at which point it will have to be dealt with again.

Human Rights Issues.

Michael D. Higgins

Question:

2 Mr. M. Higgins asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if the Government accepts that its obligations under the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and the European Convention for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment requires it to establish by way of verification, and beyond simple assurance, that persons are not being conveyed through Irish airports with the likelihood or risk that they are being conveyed for the purpose of such interrogation techniques as are in breach of such European conventions. [33557/05]

Torture is among the most abhorrent violations of human rights. It undermines the inherent dignity of the person and is, therefore, unacceptable and unjustifiable. Ireland, through a range of legal and policy measures, has signalled its recognition that freedom from torture is a right which must be protected and promoted.

Among the conventions to which Ireland is a party are the European Convention on Human Rights and the European Convention for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. The Government is extremely conscious of Ireland's obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights, including Article 3 thereof, which prohibits torture and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

The European Court of Human Rights has held that Article 3 imposes a positive obligation on states to prevent torture. A state is obliged under the convention to take measures when it knows that there are substantial grounds for believing that a person faces a real risk of being subjected to torture. The Government is satisfied that this is not the situation in the use of Irish airports by the US authorities.

On several occasions, the Government has made clear to the US authorities that it would be illegal to transit prisoners for rendition purposes through Irish territory without the express permission of the Irish authorities, acting in accordance with Irish and international law. The US authorities, for their part, have confirmed time and again that they have not done so and that they would not do so without seeking the permission of the Irish authorities. No request for such authorisation has been received from the US authorities to date.

The Government will continue to follow the long-standing practice whereby details supplied to the Department of Foreign Affairs in this area by the US authorities are accepted in good faith as being accurate.

The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform has stated in the House that An Garda Síochána would conduct a full investigation of any case where a credible claim of criminal activity has been made.

Since I first tabled this question, circumstances have changed. As recently as today, the Guardian newspaper carried details of last year’s report of the CIA’s inspector general. That report suggests that interrogation techniques authorised by the Bush presidency breach commitments given under the UN Convention against Torture. The Minister should regard that as a matter of concern.

Various international sources have verified that a plane, on lease to the US State Department and the CIA, has landed in Shannon on up to 80 occasions. The Minister has relied on assurances from the United States of America, but the UN Committee against Torture regards a simple assurance as insufficient. In the case of Sweden, admittedly, the circumstances were different because an individual was apprehended and removed, but a simple assurance was insufficient.

A debate is currently taking place in the Danish Parliament arising from the fact that the government there has refused permission to use Danish airspace to the same plane that is landing in Shannon. Despite that prohibition, however, the plane has continued to land in Denmark.

Would the Minister agree that compliance with the two European conventions and the UN Convention against Torture requires random or regular checks to be made on planes that are possibly being used for what is called "extraordinary rendition"? This is a serious matter and the ECHR aspect is being raised at the level of the European Commission. Questions are also being asked by the UN Committee against Torture. A simple assurance, such as that referred to by the Minister, is surely no longer satisfactory.

We utterly condemn torture that is meted out in contravention of any of these conventions. When media reports have raised the specific issue of the use of Shannon, I have repeatedly instructed my officials to raise the matter with the US authorities. We have been given categorical assurances on this matter. It is the same situation as pertained over the past 50 years about the use of Shannon, whether it concerned Kosovo, Somalia or other events including Vietnam and Korea.

The alleged use of what are called "black sites" in continental Europe has been raised recently.

Two days ago, Human Rights Watch released a statement providing additional background data about allegations that were supposed to have been made against two unnamed European states. Human Rights Watch said that aircraft alleged to have been involved in the transportation of prisoners by the CIA landed in airports in seven EU member states, namely Germany, the United Kingdom, Spain, Portugal, Cyprus, the Czech Republic and Greece, as well as in Switzerland and Macedonia which are outside the EU. There is no reference to Ireland in the statement. Human Rights Watch went on to say it was highly unlikely that this type of clandestine activity would operate out of a major civilian airport. The statement did not add "such as Shannon", but obviously Shannon would be included in that.

I assure the Deputy that if anybody comes forward with any solid, credible evidence that any such activity is happening on our soil at Shannon, the Government will act on it. As my colleague the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy McDowell, told the House on a previous occasion, a full investigation would take place in the event of such evidence arising. The US Administration has on many occasions given us categoric assurances. The US is a friendly state which has an incredible relationship with this country and for us to do anything other would imply that we do not believe those assurances.

It is sometimes necessary to be frank in friendly relations with another country. It is important for the Minister to know that those members of Human Rights Watch who watched the plane landing in Shannon provided information that led to the conclusion drawn in the Swedish case. It is the same plane and its flight plan included destinations such as Morocco, Uzbekistan and Egypt, countries in which torture is practised.

When we ratify the optional protocol against torture in 2006 it will be open to outside bodies to arrive in Ireland and seek to examine and convince themselves that people are not being transported in these planes.

The Human Rights Watch report is interesting too about the circumstances in which an individual was removed from Sweden, if the Minister wishes to quote it. The individual's clothes were cut off and he was chained on a mattress while the Swedish authorities looked on in shock. Extraordinary rendition is the focus of this question. It is a major blow to international law. It is outside all the framework conventions. The Minister should think about this.

It is difficult to ask a citizen or me as an Opposition spokesperson, to find the person in chains and a jump suit with a hood over his head, on a mattress in the plane. The only way to be truthful in support of both European Conventions mentioned in the question, and the United Nations Convention, is to say to the Government with which we have friendly relations: "In order to satisfy the international concern and that of our citizens we propose to institute random searches, particularly of this plane, which has nothing to do with the arrangements that existed previously."

The plane in question is on contract to the US state department and is used by the CIA whose inspector general is quoted this morning as saying that what was permitted is outside the UN Convention against torture.

We have jurisdiction only in this territory. We can do nothing else. We can condemn torture if it happens elsewhere, and I would condemn it in Poland and Romania, where it is suggested it happens. No evidence, however, has been tendered to date to lead to a substantial belief, as is required under the European Court of Human Rights, in this issue. I encourage anyone to bring forward credible evidence——

There should be random checks in Shannon.

Question No. 3 answered with QuestionNo. 1.

Decentralisation Programme.

Bernard Allen

Question:

4 Mr. Allen asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if he will report on the position with regard to the decentralisation of Development Cooperation Ireland; the current timescale envisaged for the decentralisation; the latest figures for those volunteering for this decentralisation; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [33561/05]

Under the Government's decentralisation programme, announced in December 2003, the development cooperation directorate of the Department of Foreign Affairs, based in Dublin, is scheduled to decentralise to Limerick. This will involve the relocation to Limerick of 123 posts and is scheduled to take place during the first quarter of 2007. There are 42 people working within the Department with a stated intention of decentralising to Limerick, which is 34% of the total requirement.

The Office of Public Works is assessing a possible site in Limerick. The success of decentralisation depends on the early availability of a suitable building from the OPW. My officials completed a detailed implementation plan in March of this year and submitted it to the decentralisation implementation committee for its consideration. The plan addresses a variety of issues, including human resource considerations, training and development, business issues, risk management and accommodation needs. The plan, together with regular updates, can be accessed on the Department's website.

Already, a total of 26 posts in the directorate are filled by staff who have expressed an interest in decentralising to Limerick, including seven officers recruited from other Departments via the central applications facility and five staff recruited from interdepartmental promotion panels. There are a further 16 staff elsewhere in the Department, including abroad, who have also expressed the intention of decentralising to Limerick. The process of transferring to the directorate staff serving elsewhere in the Department and of recruiting staff via the central applications facility will be accelerated in the new year. The aim is that by the second half of 2006 most posts in the directorate will be filled by staff who will decentralise to Limerick.

There are a total of 24 specialists based in the directorate headquarters and 11 applications have been received to date for these positions through the central applications facility. I hope more will volunteer as we approach the decentralisation deadline.

The Government is aware that the decentralisation process will take place during a period of significant growth in the overseas development aid budget and the strategies outlined in the implementation plan are designed to minimise these risks. Among the steps being taken are the following: to ensure continuity and to minimise disruption, Department officials are involved in detailed planning on strategies for retaining corporate memory and ensuring that there is adequate training and induction for new staff.

Additional information not given on the floor of the House.

To guard against a rapid turnover of staff in the months immediately preceding decentralisation to Limerick, the directorate has already started the process of bringing staff in from other Departments who have applied for decentralisation with Development Cooperation Ireland. The directorate's work involves liaising with other sections of the Department of Foreign Affairs, other Departments, NGOs such as Concern, Trócaire and Goal, and a wide range of international organisations. To help ensure continuing coherence, the Department, inter alia, will invest in and make considerable use of video-conferencing facilities.

Does the Minister of State agree that the decentralisation fiasco puts the development aid programme at risk? He is massaging the figures. There are 26 staff members out of 123 at DCI willing to decentralise to Limerick, approximately 21%. They do not know where they are going because two years on no property has been identified or bought in Limerick. People are being asked to decide to move without knowing where in Limerick they will go.

Does the Minister agree that with only 26 out of 123 signalling their willingness to go to Limerick there is a serious risk of wrong decisions being made? The result will be a loss of institutional memory. How can the Minister guarantee that we will get value for money on the programmes to be funded after decentralisation with such a serious loss of institutional memory?

I do not think the Deputy was listening to me. I specified a figure of 42.

It was 42 from the Department of Foreign Affairs, and 26 from DCI.

The Deputy may be relatively new to his portfolio as Opposition spokesman on foreign affairs.

The Minister of State should not patronise me. There are 26 people who do not know where they will go. It is a fiasco.

The Deputy may not be aware that DCI is a fully integrated part of the Department of Foreign Affairs, we are the Department. Although DCI has a different name it is a division of the Department, like the Europe division and so on.

A total of 26 within the division then, or whatever the Minister of State wants to call it.

It is integrated in the Department of Foreign Affairs. I am not massaging figures — 42 people within the Department are prepared to decentralise to Limerick which represents 34% of the staff requirement we will need.

How many of them are senior development specialists?

I do not understand how the Member opposite, who represents a Cork constituency, could oppose decentralisation.

I oppose the manner in which it is being done. The Minister of State should not try to put words in my mouth.

His contribution is ironic because it seems to suggest there is something untoward or wrong in moving a Department to Limerick.

Nobody suggested that. I object to the mismanagement of the move.

Many of our partner countries in Europe are decentralising——

Where in Limerick will these go?

——very serious functions to Africa, Pakistan and other places. Other countries are decentralising to the field, not within their own countries. The United Kingdom has been through a decentralisation to Scotland which has been a success.

Where in Limerick will these people go?

A site has been identified.

Two years down the line.

We will be in a position to execute this move without any great loss to the programme. We have done our homework and the officials have put in place a serious risk management strategy to ensure that corporate memory is protected and there is a hand-over period of a month as one staff comes on board and another is moved to other duties. There will be proper induction and a centralised computer system to keep the corporate knowledge. This will include official files so they are not in sections but are available in a centralised manner.

A great deal of action has been taken in preparation for this. No programme risk has occurred in other countries even though they are not only decentralising within their own countries but into the field in the developing countries they are seeking to assist. I find it incredible that we should not be decentralising to Limerick when some of our partner countries are decentralising to the field.

Can the Minister of State tell me, of the 15 or 16 senior development specialists in DCI——

I answered that question two days ago at the meeting of the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs and I also answered it last month.

Of the 15 or 16 senior development specialists, how many have indicated their willingness to decentralise? What discussions have taken place with the non-governmental organisations in this regard? Has an up-to-date risk assessment been done? The one the Minister of State recently produced was dated about March or April. Is there a current risk assessment?

The risk assessment is published on my website.

Is it up to date?

It is updated and monitored on a regular basis. Obviously we have development specialists in the field. Most of them are there, many of them local employees. Of the development specialists in headquarters, 11 out of the 24 have applied to go to Limerick and are prepared to go there. Of the senior specialist grades which the Deputy mentioned, and of which there are seven, none has currently indicated a willingness to move to Limerick. That is an issue for us because we would prefer to have these senior positions filled.

Regarding other senior positions, our director-general, Mr. Murphy, has indicated that he will be transferring to Limerick to lead the process. We have an issue related to senior management. Of the ten team members, none has indicated a willingness to go to Limerick.

That is a serious problem.

While we have a problem at the senior level, we are oversubscribed at middle and lower management ranks. Plenty of people are willing to travel.

What about the NGOs? Has the Minister of State spoken to them?

We are in regular consultation with the NGOs, weekly and almost daily.

Are they happy?

They have outlined to us their concerns, as has the advisory board which advises me as Minister for State.

Of course they have. The Minister of State should have been concerned two years ago.

We have assured them of the kind of strategies to minimise the potential risks which I outlined.

Only 26 out of 123 were agreeable.

A whole system was decentralised to Pakistan.

The Minister should let the Minister of State stand on his own two feet. I know he is making a mess of it.

There is a number of knowledge management systems being piloted on the Internet and we will have extensive use of video conferencing facilities so that whatever move is made to Limerick there will be a coherent and integrated approach in our relationship with the Department of Foreign Affairs in Dublin and our colleagues there. I do not anticipate any great difficulties.

The Minister of State just does not know yet where he is going.

It has become quite the trend internationally, in Holland, Britain and in other countries, to decentralise to the field.

I have heard about international trends, one of them being towards electronic voting. That was quite a mess.

At the same time I hear Members on the opposite side of the House objecting to decentralisation which involves travelling less than 200 miles down the road. Deputy Allen is displaying the usual Irish absurd obsession with short distances and conflating them with large distances.

The Minister of State should not be ridiculous. He does not even know where he is going.

Overseas Development Aid.

Michael D. Higgins

Question:

5 Mr. M. Higgins asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs his views on the shortfall on international contributions to the United Nations appeal for Pakistan; the reason for such a shortfall; and the measures he intends to take by way of international pressure to ameliorate this situation as far as the European Union and the international community are concerned. [33558/05]

Ireland was among the first countries to respond to the appalling disaster in South Asia. Within a few hours of the earthquake, €1 million was pledged towards immediate relief efforts in northern Pakistan and the surrounding regions. As the casualty figures rose dramatically, our response was increased to €5 million, placing Ireland as one of the highest donors to the disaster on a per capita basis. Ireland’s rapid contribution has been warmly and broadly welcomed.

Ireland's pledge to the disaster has been fully committed. It is essential that pledges are honoured so that vital assistance can be delivered to save lives. Approximately €1.5 million of our assistance has been allocated to key UN humanitarian agencies, including UNICEF and the World Food Programme. Over €2.5 million has been allocated to non-governmental organisations such as Concern, GOAL, Oxfam, Plan Ireland and Trócaire, which are active in the provision of essential services on the ground. These services include the provision of food, health services, shelter, water and sanitation.

Logistically, this disaster is one of the toughest challenges faced by the UN and the international community. Some 15,000 villages were affected and many are in areas which are difficult to reach. We are continually monitoring the situation in the region and officials from my Department will conduct a technical mission to the areas affected to meet with our partners on the ground and to report on the issues facing the region. Ireland will be represented at the reconstruction conference planned to take place in Islamabad on 19 November next.

The updated UN "flash appeal" for the region has called for nearly $550 million in funding for immediate relief needs. A little over €130 million has been pledged to date. Some of the pledges made by donors have yet to materialise into confirmed contributions. Even if all the pledges are confirmed, that still leaves a very considerable shortfall. I support President Musharraf's call for more generous assistance, specifically from Islamic, EU and OECD states. I have stressed the urgency of the provision of further aid and the importance of honouring pledges to my EU counterparts at a meeting of EU Development Ministers which was hosted by the British Presidency in Leeds in the past few weeks.

It will take much analysis and probably the benefit of considerable hindsight to understand why one crisis may generate huge public support while another suffers a shortfall. We may never know the full answer to this. The international community's response to the tsunami disaster was overwhelming and very generous. However, there are many humanitarian crises in the world at any one time. They generate various levels of support. Regrettably some become "forgotten" crises. That is why Ireland is a strong advocate of the principles and good practice of good humanitarian donorship or GHD. By leading donors, including Ireland, this initiative seeks to ensure the response to humanitarian crises is based purely on needs assessment and allocated according to the principles of independence, neutrality, humanity and impartiality.

Ireland also supports the moves by the UN to strengthen the international response to humanitarian crises. The number and scale of natural disasters this year reinforces the need for global resources to be mobilised and deployed rapidly to bring humanitarian relief on a large scale to anywhere in the world. Ireland has been actively focussing on how we can better respond to such emergencies.

Internationally, Ireland supports the enhancement of the UN's central emergency relief fund and I have pledged €10 million to that end.

Additional information not given on the floor of the House.

This will create a new grant-based fund that will allow UN agencies to respond more immediately and effectively in the face of a sudden on-set of a disaster. Work is also continuing at EU level to improve civil protection and rapid response capability through the tsunami follow-up action plan. The further development of rapid response capacity must complement and support the UN's primary role as coordinator in humanitarian disasters. At the national level, we are examining ways in which the Government's response to disasters and emergencies can be enhanced through a more operational role. That work is being actively pursued.

With regard to the contribution of other donors, the UN financial tracking system maintains information on donors' contributions to UN appeals and more broadly on donors' contributions to particular emergencies. According to the information available to my Department in relation to the South Asia earthquake, the per capita donor contribution to date is set out in a table which I have made available to Deputies.

Per capita humanitarian grant comparison table.

Country

Population

Contribution

%

Qatar

860,000

20,000,000

23.26

Sweden

9,000,000

18,801,000

2.09

Ireland

3,600,000

5,000,000

1.39

Norway

4,600,000

4,267,000

0.93

Denmark

5,400,000

4,839,000

0.90

Netherlands

16,400,000

12,056,000

0.74

Switzerland

7,500,000

3,274,000

0.44

Canada

32,800,000

12,983,000

0.40

Australia

20,000,000

7,675,000

0.38

United States

295,700,000

97,044,000

0.33

Finland

5,200,000

1,202,000

0.23

Japan

127,400,000

24,340,000

0.19

Belgium

10,400,000

1,965,000

0.19

United Kingdom

60,400,000

10,665,000

0.18

Turkey

69,600,000

10,254,000

0.15

Greece

10,700,000

1,574,000

0.15

Saudi Arabia

26,400,000

3,263,000

0.12

Austria

18,200,000

2,236,000

0.12

Italy

58,100,000

6,929,000

0.12

Malaysia

23,950,000

2,380,000

0.10

Germany

82,400,000

7,715,000

0.09

France

60,650,000

3,606,000

0.06

My question concentrated mostly on the international response and while I appreciate the Minister of State's detailed comments on the Irish response, it is on the international response I would like to ask him some further questions.

The reality, which requires little analysis, is that $550 million has been sought, and of that, as the Minister of State noted, $133 million has been pledged. Of that latter figure, $84 million has been received. That is where we stand. We now have 3 million people on their 30th night of living in the open with a specific request for their needs of 100,000 to 200,000 tents. The death rates, though we cannot judge their accuracy, are not below 175,000 with 70,000 injured. That needs further analysis and there are questions of remoteness.

The issue is that of the international community's response which is running at less than 25% of Kofi Annan's appeal. While it will be interesting to compare one set of responses to another, there has been an outrageous neglect in terms of the response, which represents a moral challenge.

Europe has been very good at responding. I am not pointing a finger, but the additional €80 million being suggested by the European Commission is conditional on approval by the Council of Ministers in the European Parliament. Has that approval been given? The issue is simply one of the European Commission responding to the international outrage at the huge shortfall on this very obvious appeal.

We can identify the needs and the costs involved but help has not been provided, nor has there been movement with regard to the tents required by 2 million people. Are the mechanisms for approval in place? The Minister of State referred to the November conference but that will be too late. The figures for reconstruction are welcome and will be valuable in the spring but it will be too late by then for hundreds of thousands of people. Funding is needed now for an immediate response. While I support the Government on its proposals to the UN for emergency mechanisms to respond to disasters, the misery of the response on this occasion is atypical.

I share the Deputy's utter frustration in this regard. I do not wish to be seen as patting ourselves on the back but Ireland has responded consistently and rapidly to every humanitarian crisis of 2005. As the Minister, Deputy Dermot Ahern, insisted at the beginning of the year with regard to the tsunami, we have diligently tracked these pledges and held countries to account so that promises are honoured and the delivery of money is not delayed. We deliver in a timely manner so it is a cause of frustration to us that some countries which pledge do not deliver and some do not pledge. Why have some people been timely in responding to other crises but not with regard to the events in Pakistan?

I met Pakistan's ambassador to Dublin, who pleaded with me to put pressure on other donor countries, including other European countries, to provide money to help these people who, as the Deputy noted, are in a desperate and unconscionable situation. I have decided to write to my European Union colleagues and to other countries which have not contributed to this appeal to put them under pressure.

Last Monday, the Minister attended a meeting of European Union Foreign Ministers, at which Jack Straw, in his role as President of the Council, put further pressure on our European colleagues to provide money. This task is not easy because evidence of previous crises suggests that certain countries specialise in making pledges but do not deliver on them. We have asked, at OECD and UN level, that such response be tracked and reported on.

I cannot shed light on the Deputy's query on the European Union's €18 million but I can revert to him on the matter. The Commission has a stand-by response fund of €5 million which can be spent immediately without needing to consult the mechanisms referred to by the Deputy.

A proposal has been made for at least €80 million and we await the response of the Council of Ministers and the European Parliament.

Generally speaking, the European response is good. The Minister made strong representations at every level in terms of equipping Europe with a more appropriate and speedy civil response mechanism. He consistently identified such a priority at meetings throughout this year and we intend to follow that up.

It is frustrating that not everyone is like us in providing money. Alongside the Nordic states and the UK, we are part of a like-minded group of countries which is performing well. These circumstances are mirrored in the wider development scene. Europe is delivering on long-term development financial assistance in terms of target dates for the achievement of 0.7%, but other countries, including wealthy G8 members, cause me deep despondency by not delivering on percentage commitments.

I made a pledge in New York with regard to the central emergency relief fund and we will back it if a proper mechanism is devised. Such a fund is badly needed because it is criminal to assign to the UN the primary role in responding to these types of human and natural disasters if the organisation is not funded to respond in a timely manner. We are moving to address that matter.

Can we fast-track the response to the Council of Ministers and the European Parliament with regard to the €80 million?

I will inquire of the Commissioner for Development and Humanitarian Aid, Mr. Louis Michel, whether that can be done and will revert to the Deputy. As Europe has its own ways of working, I am reluctant to give a firm commitment on that matter.

Top
Share