Vol. 698 No. 3
33 Deputy Kieran O’Donnell asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs his plans to promote more debt cancellation, free from conditions, for all southern countries that require it; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [46651/09]
Ireland has played an important role internationally on the issue of the alleviation of the debt burden on developing countries. The Government's policy strategy was prepared jointly by the Department of Foreign Affairs and the Department of Finance, and was launched in 2002. It supports the total cancellation of the debts of the world's poorest countries. A joint review of this strategy is currently being undertaken by the two Departments and I expect it will be completed within the coming months.
It is important to note that Ireland's bilateral assistance to the developing world has always been exclusively in the form of grants rather than loans. The Government has also provided very significant resources for initiatives to ease or cancel the debt burden.
There are two main international instruments which address the debt burden on developing countries. They are the Multilateral Debt Relief Initiative, MDRI, and the Heavily-Indebted Poor Countries Initiative. The MDRI came into effect on 1 July 2006, and provides for the cancellation of eligible debt from the World Bank, the African Development Bank and the International Monetary Fund for many of the world's poorest and most indebted countries. Ireland's share of the total cost of debt relief provided by the World Bank under the initiative is €58.64 million. The Government contributed this amount in full in 2006. Ireland has also contributed over €20 million under the 1996 heavily indebted poor countries initiative, which is implemented by the World Bank and the IMF, with the objective of reducing the debt burden of qualifying countries to sustainable levels.
The aim of these international initiatives is to relieve the poorest countries from the burden of servicing debt, and help them implement effective poverty-reduction and economic growth programmes. It is important to ensure that the success of the initiatives to date is not undermined by any further irresponsible lending or borrowing by these countries. The Government supports the development of an international consensus on responsible lending and borrowing procedures and I welcome the dialogue which the World Bank has initiated with civil society groups on the complex issues involved.
Was the €58.64 million contributed under the MDRI initiative in 2006 classified as Irish aid funding at the time? Am I right that there is a review ongoing currently on debt cancellation? When can we expect the publication of this review?
This money is considered part of official development assistance, ODA, and is counted towards the targets we discussed previously. On the review, I expect ——
The problem I have is one figure is given for ODA, but other figures are filtered down throughout the year and they all come from the one budget.
The Deputy must appreciate this is a significant contribution to a massive global fund. Many of these countries want to develop, but cannot because they cannot get access to the international capital and bond markets because of their heavy debt burdens. By forgiving this debt, albeit with conditions which ensure they have the capacity and power to maintain sustainable financial economies in their own right and by focusing their lending on poverty reduction, we are making a real contribution towards enabling these countries to develop their economies under their own national development plans. This is quite apart from our bilateral programmes where, through grant assistance, we initiate and help development and programmes. By engaging significantly in this programme, we allow these countries develop in their own right. Ultimately, that is what sustainable development is about and it is important.
When will we see the policy debt review?
The Minister of State referred to the World Bank initiative. Is he concerned at the high proportion of odious debt that remains in the outstanding debt of the southern countries referred to in the question? The World Bank is insisting on interest repayments from countries indebted by dictators, for example, Nigeria in 1995-2000, €15 billion — €1.5 billion in 23 London banks, €600 million in Liechtenstein, €500 million in Luxembourg. The Minister, Deputy Martin, referred earlier to Switzerland and its legate. With regard to the debt issue, is there any possibility of the opening up of the books in Switzerland?
The purchase of the debt of southern countries by debt vultures is a continuing heavy burden. I support the Minister's emphasis on development, but these debts — odious dictators' debts — are being serviced and providing remuneration to debt vultures. The World Bank is not forgoing that, nor is the International Monetary Fund with its Limón arrangements.
I agree fully with Deputy Higgins on this issue. Vulture debt is an odious practice and I would welcome any initiative to make this internationally illegal. Debt vulture hedge funds or other funds involved in buying debt on the verge or eve of it being forgiven as part of international debt alleviation is a reprehensible practice. In essence it represents funds in the major financial markets preying on countries just before they experience debt relief and trying to extract enormous profits from them.
The issue of what is known as illegitimate debt has arisen more frequently in discussions on international debt relief. This is why initiatives such as the UNCTAD initiative to address responsible lending and, in particular, to closely involve the World Bank, IMF, the Paris Club and civil society so as to properly define proper, legitimate — and almost moral — debt and lending to these countries are so important. We cannot go back to the situation we had where there was irresponsible borrowing and lending by states in which we are involved. We want these states to build up their inherent country systems to ensure they do not go down the road of irresponsible lending and borrowing again.
34 Deputy Olwyn Enright asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs the role he played in the recent release of a person (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [46819/09]
It was a great privilege and a joy to announce the release on 11 November of Fr. Michael Sinnott after 32 days in captivity. His release was the result of an intense diplomatic effort by the Irish and Philippine Governments, working through the mechanisms of the Mindanao peace process. No ransom was paid to secure Fr. Sinnott's release nor was there any use of force. This was a victory for persuasion, perseverance, and patient diplomacy.
On hearing of the abduction on 11 October, I immediately asked our ambassador to the Philippines, Mr. Richard O'Brien, who is based in Singapore, to travel to Manila to work with the Philippine authorities to help secure Fr. Sinnott's early release. He was joined in Manila on 25 October by Mr. Robert Hull, an official from Ireland's Mission in Timor-Leste. Ambassador O'Brien engaged in talks with the Government of the Philippines, representatives of the Moro Islamic Liberation Front, MILF, local officials in Mindanao, members of the Columban order in the Philippines and several international NGOs. We worked closely with our EU partners and the European Commission delegation. The ambassador also met with the Papal Nuncio and with Philippine church leaders. I would like to underline our deep appreciation to the United States Government for its assistance, as well as the Malaysian authorities.
On 21 October, the ambassador. Mr. O'Brien travelled with a high-level delegation of EU ambassadors to Mindanao, the southernmost island of the Philippines, which is home to a number of armed Islamist secessionist groups and where the security situation remains extremely fragile. While in Mindanao, the ambassador had a separate meeting with the leadership of the MILF at their headquarters in the jungle. He made a strong plea for Fr. Sinnott's release and received assurances from the MILF that they would do everything in their power to bring the kidnap to an end. Our ambassador to the Vatican, Mr. Noel Fahey, also maintained contact with the Columban order in Rome.
I was in direct contact with my Philippine counterpart, Foreign Secretary Romulo, to convey the great concerns of both the Government and the Irish public. I emphasised our desire to see the kidnap resolved in a peaceful manner. I have since expressed my sincere gratitude to the Philippine Government for the consistently excellent co-operation it extended to us in securing Fr. Sinnott's release. The Sinnott family and the Columban Fathers demonstrated remarkable stoicism throughout their ordeal. I spoke to them on several occasions, and my officials maintained daily contact with them to brief them on developments.
Fr. Sinnott arrived in Dublin airport on 3 December, where he was anxiously awaited by his family and friends. Officials from my Department who had worked on the case were also present to greet him on behalf of the Government. I met with Fr. Michael and three of his Columban colleagues in Leinster House on Thursday last to welcome him back to Ireland and to discuss his experience. Our meeting left me with a strong impression of a truly selfless and dedicated man, and with an even deeper appreciation of the inspirational work carried out by our missionaries abroad.
Fr. Sinnott was particularly pleased with the acknowledgment that the Chair gave him when he was in the Visitors Gallery. Today, he is attending a special ceremony with the President in Áras an Uachtaráin. However, because we are busy here, we are not in a position to attend that.
I met him yesterday when crossing the street in Clonard, a place that might be known to some of those here.
That is a bit far from the Leas-Cheann Comhairle's bailiwick in the centre of Wexford to be out knocking on doors. I know the place well.
I want to compliment the Minister on the work done by the Department of Foreign Affairs, particularly that of ambassador O'Brien, in assisting in getting the release of Fr. Sinnott. Unfortunately, his release is in stark contrast to the murder of the Kiltegan priest, Fr. Roche. We would like to sympathise on his tragic passing.
I raised the issue of the safety of Irish people abroad with the Minister of Defence during discussion on defence legislation a couple of months ago. This is probably not as applicable to Ministers as it is to NGOs. The Minister said he would have a discussion on this with his colleague. If he has not, will he take this up? While I am conscious of the fact that aid agencies are aware of security, one can never have too many measures in place.
I agree that the events of recent months are a cause of deep concern. There is clearly an increase in the frequency of such events. I, too, sympathise with the family of the late Fr. Roche, the priest of the Kiltegan Fathers who was murdered last week. We are very concerned about this. My officials will be drawing lessons from the recent incidents and we will be in discussion with the NGOs to ensure the optimal security of workers and volunteers who go overseas to be of service to very vulnerable people.
It is a very happy outcome that Fr. Michael Sinnott has been released since the matter of his captivity was raised on the Adjournment some weeks ago. He was very impressive when we met him. The graciousness of his response, his courage and his commitment to the people, to whom he is to return in January, are admirable.
With regard to the murder of a Kiltegan Father in Kenya, it is very important that it be pointed out, as the Minister for Foreign Affairs has done, that attacks on such people are attacks on all the people of Ireland.
All the people in question who work abroad do not qualify for pensions in the Irish system on the grounds that they do not meet the habitual residency requirement.
That is certainly broadening the scope of the question.
It is an issue we will address sometime.
I support the Deputies' remarks. I have already stated in public that the performance of our public servants, particularly Ambassador O'Brien, demonstrated public service at its best.
Absolutely.
That should be articulated clearly. Ambassador O'Brien and Mr. Robert Hull went to extraordinary lengths, as did our ambassador in Kuala Lumpur. One gets some sense of the network of people involved. One might ask why there is such a network in Malaysia but that is where the Mindanao peace process was being brokered. That peace process was central to the release of Fr. Sinnott. At times such as these, we must reflect on the quality of Irish people overseas and the extraordinary work they do in very difficult circumstances when called upon to do so.
Does the Minister agree that, although US foreign policy comes in for criticism quite regularly in this Chamber, it is important to acknowledge the role US foreign affairs officials played in securing the release of Fr. Sinnott?
The US Government was of great assistance to us and has been on an ongoing basis in respect of such issues. I refer in particular to the case of Fr. Michael Sinnott. Secretary of State Clinton was particularly helpful. I have written to her thanking her for her interest in this case and for the help and assistance of her Government. I have written to quite a few Governments to thank them for their general co-operation in respect of this case. I have also written to the head of the MILF, who wrote back and made the point that the Northern Ireland peace process is a model that interested parties in his part of the world aspire to emulate.
Written Answers follow Adjournment Debate.
