Vol. 742 No. 2
41 Deputy Seán Ó Fearghaíl asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade his views on whether there will be discussions between Israel and Palestine; when these will take place; and if there will be a time frame put on the outcome. [27383/11]
Direct negotiations between the two sides are the only way to achieve a comprehensive peace settlement in the Middle East. The issues are complex and difficult, but they are not insoluble and an agreement is there to be had, if there is the political will on both sides. The United States, under President Obama, with the support of the European Union and the Quartet, has worked over a long period to try to bring about the beginning of talks between the parties. However, apart from a brief and abortive beginning in September 2010, their efforts have been frustrated.
Last week the Quartet issued an important statement setting out a timetable for renewed talks. This calls for a preparatory meeting between the two sides to take place within one month to agree to a timetable of not later than the end of 2012 to reach an agreement. The parties will be expected to come forward within three months with comprehensive proposals on the initial issues of security and borders and to deal substantially with these within six months. Other issues would be addressed as progress allowed. This is a challenging timetable, but there is no reason it cannot be achieved if the parties genuinely wish to reach an agreement and are prepared to take the risks required. In particular, Israel must be encouraged to see that its own best interests are not served by maintaining the short-term advantages of the status quo and the occupation.
I very much hope we can convince the parties to engage on this basis. It is particularly important that they create the right conditions for success by refraining from provocative actions, including further settlement expansion. In this context, I condemn last week's announcement of 1,000 new dwellings being constructed in the east Jerusalem settlement of Gilo. Ireland, both nationally and in the European Union, will do everything it can to support the relaunching of substantive peace talks.
I thank the Tánaiste for his response and congratulate him on his contribution at the UN General Assembly on 26 September. There had been some speculation in the media on that occasion that he would perhaps depart from his speech on Ireland's traditional position in terms of the Middle East conflict. I commend him for the position he took. All parties in the House will be supportive of the work on which he will engage in the future.
The Tánaiste quoted appropriately Martin Luther King in terms of the "fierce urgency of now". In fairness, this is reflected in the response of the Quartet and the timescale set out. Given the impediments and particular problems with Mr. Netanyahu, will the Tánaiste indicate whether he and his EU colleagues will engage collectively or bilaterally on the matter and whether it is envisaged that he or other EU foreign Ministers will meet Mr. Netanyahu directly to try to address the awful problem of the continued settlement expansion because therein lies the greatest difficulty?
I thank the Deputy for his support of the statement which I made on behalf of the country at the United Nations last week. I also thank Deputy Mac Lochlainn, among other Deputies, for expressing support for that position.
I am very conscious that the position I outlined at the UN General Assembly is a national one. As Deputy Ó Fearghaíl indicated, this country has had a long-standing policy of supporting Palestinian statehood. The resolution of the problem in the Middle East will only come about following discussions.
The Quartet statement provides a timetable within which discussions would get under way within a month and then a period within which the issues of borders and security would be addressed, and it sets a definite date by which negotiations should be completed by the end of 2012.
The High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Baroness Catherine Ashton, on behalf of the European Union, has been engaged with both sides in seeking to bring that forward. There will be a meeting of the Foreign Affairs Council of the European Union next week and I expect that the issue will be discussed further at that stage.
I intend to visit the Middle East at some stage. I have not yet set exact dates for it but I will co-ordinate with Baroness Ashton about that so that the position of the European Union and its Foreign Ministers can be co-ordinated in the efforts that we make.
I welcome that response. An active approach is required in this instance. Given the trade relations between Israel and many EU member states, bilateral connectivity between the Governments of EU states and the Israeli Government could be helpful to bring all parties to the table as a matter of urgency.
I agree with that. There is ongoing bilateral contact between European Union states and our own. I have spoken directly with the Israeli Foreign Minister, Mr. Lieberman, about the issue and I intend to do that again. When we are in a position to diary it, in particular, I intend to co-ordinate this with Baroness Ashton, to schedule a visit to the Middle East and to make our own direct involvement in the issue in order to help and facilitate moving talks forward.
42 Deputy Pádraig Mac Lochlainn asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade his views that the relatively limited damage done by the drought in Kenya and Ethiopia can be attributed to his overall development strategy and that of the international community in those countries; and if he will explain the rationale by which he has funded specific non-governmental organisations during the recent emergency in the Horn of Africa. [27381/11]
The appalling situation in the Horn of Africa highlights the importance of planning longer-term solutions to the problem of hunger in developing countries. This is exemplified by the effect of the crisis on Ethiopia and Somalia. Somalia, which has been wracked by conflict for two decades, is reeling from the ravages of the drought. Ethiopia, which has a stable Government and a strong relationship with the international community, is meeting the challenge head-on.
While there are undoubtedly enormous humanitarian needs in Ethiopia, mechanisms to deal with the crisis are being deployed against a backdrop of relative peace, stability and high levels of Government co-ordination. Ireland has played a role in building this resilience, as Ethiopia has been a priority country for Ireland's aid programme since 1994. A clear example is our support to the productive safety net programme, which provides the vulnerable with predictable cash or food transfers in return for work on projects such as land rehabilitation. This programme helps to protect the lives of more than 7 million people annually. This year, the Government has allocated more than €32 million to Ethiopia.
Kenya is not a priority country for Irish Aid but NGOs, missionaries and the UN system are working in longer-term development activities there and receive significant support from Ireland. Based on 2010 expenditure we expect to provide more than €7 million in assistance in 2011.
In addition, the Government has allocated more than €10 million in emergency support to the current crisis and has committed an additional €10 million before the end of 2012. Funding decisions are based on the ability of partner agencies to address the most urgent needs, such as emergency feeding programmes which target the most vulnerable. These allocations have also been informed by the recommendations of three field visits by Irish Aid officials to the region this year.
When we discussed this earlier this year, I raised the issue of the resuscitation of boreholes as one approach that we could take.
As the Minister of State will be aware, the first problem in the Horn of Africa, and why there has been a famine declared in a number of regions of Somalia, is the political instability which prevents having a long-term approach such as that we have seen in Ethiopia. It is clear that the same environmental circumstances pertain to Ethiopia and Kenya, but they have not faced famine at this point. What can Ireland do, as part of the international community, to address the food instability crisis as it pertains to Africa, particularly at times like this? How do we deal with the commodity-based approach to vital crops that could save lives in these areas? What can Ireland do as part of the European Union? The Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs and Trade recommended that an EU envoy be sent to the region to address the political instability there. It is being reported that the al-Shabab group, which has deterred those who are trying to provide aid and save lives, carried out a bombing in Mogadishu today. How can we play a part in finding a solution? How can we ensure these problems are not repeated in the future?
We can raise our voices in all the international forums at which we are represented, including the foreign ministers' forum, which the Tánaiste attends, the development ministers' forum, which I attend, and the UN agencies. We have consistently raised our voices at international level. At the recent meeting of development ministers in Poland, I raised the need for a co-ordinated response from the European Union in this context. We also have a presence through Irish non-governmental organisations on the ground. It is difficult to get into Somalia with aid. Agencies like Concern, Trócaire and the International Committee of the Red Cross have a long-term presence and local staff in Somalia. We receive a great deal of information about what is happening on the ground through those agencies. The answer to the Deputy's question is that we have to continue to use whatever opportunities we have in an international context, for example through the EU or the UN, to raise these issues and support any measures being taken to bring some kind of peace and stability to the area in question.
I commend the Government on its efforts to assist in meeting the $1.87 billion international target that has been set in the context of this immediate emergency. I understand that we have committed more than €10 million and we have said we will commit a further €10 million. We have met our responsibilities. It appears to me that many of our international partners, including EU member states, have not met their responsibilities. What is the current position in terms of meeting the targets I have mentioned? Is the Government happy that its European and international partners have responded adequately? Are we happy that the non-governmental organisations with which we are working have a long-term approach to dealing with the issues I raised in my initial question? I will return to the question of aid effectiveness, which arises in this context.
I understand that a total of $1.8 billion has been contributed as part of the international response. The UN has identified that a further $700 million will be required by the end of the year. The Deputy is right to suggest that some countries, including Ireland, have had a strong response whereas many other countries have had a relatively weak response. We need to continue to raise this issue at international level. The Deputy's second question related to non-governmental organisations.
I asked whether we are happy that the non-governmental organisations and UN organisations we support — having looked at the list, I am satisfied they are of international repute — have a long-term approach to working on the ground and helping to overcome political instability. We need to ensure agricultural matters are addressed, for example by providing bore holes.
We are running out of time.
I am just clarifying that long-term solutions are needed.
We are in ongoing discussions with those bodies to ensure such solutions are provided. The very fact that they are among the small number of international non-governmental organisations that are actually allowed into parts of Somalia is an indication that they are there for the long haul. They have been working there for a long time.
43 Deputy Clare Daly asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, noting the UN Resolution 2009 of 16 September, that the UN proposes to establish a three month support mission to Libya, if Irish participation is being proposed and the form of same. [27386/11]
I welcome the adoption by the UN Security Council on 16 September of Resolution 2009. This resolution reaffirmed that the United Nations should lead the efforts of the international community in supporting the Libyan-led transition and rebuilding process aimed at establishing a democratic, independent and united Libya. It also established the United Nations Support Mission for Libya, UNSMIL. UNSMIL's mandate is to assist Libyan national efforts in a range of areas, including the restoration of public security and order, the promotion of the rule of law, the restoration of public service and support for human rights. Mr. Ian Martin has been appointed UN Special Representative and Head of UNSMIL.
UNSMIL is a civilian mission and will largely be staffed by police, judicial and political experts. It is expected that, at full strength, the mission will have a staff of about 60 persons. Many of these are expected to be drawn from within the UN system itself. I understand that, as a consequence, only a limited number of potential contributors have been approached. To date, Ireland has not received a request to contribute to UNSMIL. If such a request is received, it will be given careful consideration.
In addition to the establishment of the new UNSMIL mission, UN Security Council Resolution 2009 also sends political messages to the new administration in Libya and modifies arrangements for the arms embargo, the asset freeze and the no-fly zone. My Department continues to follow the situation in Libya closely. In addition, Irish Aid has provided over €1.3 million in humanitarian assistance to Libya since the beginning of this year.
I would certainly welcome and fully support the move of the peoples of Libya for democracy but I do not believe the role of the UN and, in particular, NATO has done anything to further that aim. I note the Tánaiste said we have not received a request as of yet but, clearly, he would be open to an Irish intervention if that was the case. When one considers the role of the UN in the scenario in Libya to date, one would have to examine this. In reality, what we have had is a cover under the guise of the need to protect civilians, a claim that was contradicted by Amnesty and Human Rights Watch. There was a military intervention on one side of a civil war which went beyond the original objective of United Nations Resolution 1973——
A question, please.
The question is that this was the starting point of the international intervention under the guise of the UN. Effectively, everything was left to NATO, which had troops on the ground and basically outsourced security and peacekeeping, funded the Transitional National Council and is now intervening to deal with the fallout. It is not very democratic, particularly when a majority of the world's population opposed or abstained in regard to the original resolution to move into Libya.
Will the Tánaiste comment on the question of whether, if this request comes back, it will be dealt with? If the UN asks him, will he say "yes"?
First, I disagree with Deputy Daly in respect of the role of the United Nations in regard to Libya. This country has always argued that the United Nations should be at the centre, at the heart, of the actions taken by the international community, which was the case in this case. Resolution 1973 was for the purpose of ensuring that civilian populations would be protected. We can recall the way in which Gadaffi was attacking people in Misrata and, at an earlier stage, in Benghazi.
The position now is that it is not intended the United Nations will have any military presence in Libya. The presence that is intended by the UN is a civilian presence to support the establishment of democracy in Libya, the development of its public services and the rebuilding of the country after what has happened there.
As I said, Ireland has not been requested as of yet to provide any assistance. The type of request I would expect would be in the area of the provision of police, civil service experts, perhaps people from development agencies, such as Irish Aid, to develop humanitarian aid and perhaps in regard to infrastructural rebuilding. If we receive such a request, we will consider it very favourably, but no request has yet come.
Despite what the Tánaiste says, the UN was not at the centre of operations. In reality, it stood back and allowed NATO call the shots. The Tánaiste has again reiterated there would be no military presence. We were told this all during the situation yet everybody knows that special forces from the US, France and Britain were actively on the ground in contravention of the UN resolution. The point is they facilitated regime change in a country that has the biggest oil reserves in Africa. Clearly what is designed here is not assistance to develop democracy in Libya but to move in on that country's vital resources, including oil and water, and potentially one also will see a US military base on that continent.
During the course of the week I was at the United Nations in New York, I attended a high-level meeting on Libya on 20 September. I have heard what the National Transitional Council and its representatives have had to say, which is it is the council's intention to build a democratic state in Libya. It will be supported in that effort by the United Nations and Ireland will in turn support the UN. Under resolution 2009, the United Nations has been given the lead role in post-conflict Libya and Ireland will play its part, either directly or through its participation in the European Union.
44 Deputy Seán Ó Fearghaíl asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade the number of bilateral meetings he has held at EU level; the issues that were discussed; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27384/11]
The Government came into office with an explicit commitment to restore Ireland's standing as a respected and influential member of the European Union. Members of the Government are availing of opportunities to meet their EU colleagues, as well as representatives of the European institutions, to underline the Government's constructive engagement with the European agenda and to ensure close working relationships at political level across the Union.
Since taking office six months ago, I have attended a number of EU ministerial meetings and at this stage have had the opportunity to exchange views on the key issues on the EU agenda with all my EU colleagues. These contacts are critical in conveying and ensuring a good understanding of our objectives and interests and of positions we are taking on EU and international issues.
I have had, on the one hand, formal bilateral meetings with a number of counterparts and on the other, a wide range of informal discussions in a variety of fora. In April, for example, I met with my counterparts from Luxembourg and Finland on the margins of the General Affairs Council meeting of 13 April.
In May, I met the United Kingdom's Deputy Prime Minister, Nick Clegg, and the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, William Hague, in London. During the Queen's visit to Ireland, I had the opportunity of further meetings with Foreign Secretary Hague. I also in May had a detailed exchange of views with the French Foreign Minister, Alain Juppé. Our discussion focused on issues on the international agenda, including the Middle East peace process and the events of the Arab spring, as well as economic issues.
In July, I met the German Foreign Minister, Guido Westerwelle, for bilateral consultations in Berlin. The focus of our discussion was on economic issues and we also addressed international issues including the Middle East and the Arab spring. I have also had extensive bilateral contact with my Lithuanian colleague, Audronius Azubalis, and with the Lithuanian Prime Minister, Andrius Kubilius, on issues related to Ireland's forthcoming chairmanship of the OSCE, as well as the EU Presidency responsibilities which we both will assume in 2013.
Last week, I had bilateral discussions with individual EU counterparts at a number of events we attended together on the margins of the UN General Assembly opening week in New York. These events included the ministerial breakfast on mediation on 20 September, which also was attended by the Finnish, Belgian and Swedish Foreign Ministers, the high level meeting on Libya and the traditional EU-Russia and EU-US meetings.
The Minister of State, Deputy Creighton, has also had a substantial number of bilateral meetings at EU level, including with the secretaries general of the Commission and the Council and the President of the European Parliament, as well as with British, French, German, Polish, Bulgarian, Slovak and Greek counterparts.
I thank the Tánaiste for his response. He raised this issue himself last July when he referred to a meeting he had held with Mr. Alain Juppé. I tabled a question in the context of the clear need to have a carefully planned programme of engagement in respect of both Ireland's EU-IMF programme and the Tánaiste's responsibilities with regard to trade. I suggest that what the Tánaiste has set out for Members today constitutes a disappointing level of bilateral engagement. The Tánaiste's reply indicates there were at most six formal bilateral meetings. As far greater activity is required, does the Tánaiste have in place a plan to have a comprehensive level of bilateral engagement both on the EU-IMF programme and with regard to his highly specific and important responsibilities in the area of trade promotion? What seems like two informal engagements with Mr. William Hague, Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, of our major trading partner, appears to be an inadequate response to the challenges facing us.
As I stated, I have met all my EU colleagues. Some of these meetings have been formal, bells and whistles, bilateral meetings, while some have been discussions on the margins of EU Foreign Affairs and General Affairs Council meetings and various UN and OSC meetings, to which there has been a number of objectives. In the period leading up to our renegotiations with the European Union and the IMF it was clearly important to brief all the Foreign Ministers on Ireland's objectives and, in particular, to discuss directly with them the issues and difficulties surrounding the reduction in our interest rate. There were also requests from other countries in respect of our corporation tax regime. The bilateral meetings I held with the French Minister for Foreign Affairs, Mr. Juppé, and the German Minister for Foreign Affairs, Mr. Westerwelle, in particular, were focused on the reduction in the interest rate and the issue of the corporation tax rate. As the Deputy knows, we have now secured a reduction in the interest rate and at the same time retained our rate of corporation tax.
Regarding my meetings with the British Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, Mr. Hague, I remind the Deputy that in the course of the British Queen's visit to Ireland we established a British-Irish chambers of commerce for the first time, formalising the trade relationship between Britain and Ireland.
45 Deputy Pádraig Mac Lochlainn asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade his views that while the principles contained in the White Paper on Irish Aid remain valid, greater transparency and public discussion could lead to stronger adherence to these principles, and hence, to stronger results for poor persons around the world; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [27321/11]
Public support and engagement are essential for the successful delivery of the Government's aid programme which is managed by Irish Aid in the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. The principles that guide the programme are set out in the White Paper on Irish Aid. Transparency and public ownership are central. They ensure our assistance delivers clear results in the lives of poor people and communities and makes a practical contribution to the fight against global poverty and hunger. They ensure a focus on the poorest communities in some of the world's poorest countries, the building of strong partnerships, and effective and efficient use of resources. That is why Ireland is recognised internationally as a leader in making aid more effective.
The oversight provided by the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs and Trade and the Committee of Public Accounts is extremely important in this regard, as is the role played by the independent Irish Aid expert advisory group. Irish Aid has in place comprehensive systems of appraisal, monitoring, audit and evaluation to ensure funds are spent effectively and benefit the most vulnerable people.
It is essential that the public can engage actively with the aid programme and have easy access to clear information on its priorities and programmes. The Irish Aid annual report which I launched recently at the Irish Aid volunteering and information centre provides full details on the programme's activities and expenditure and the practical results being achieved.
We are undertaking a review of the White Paper on Irish Aid. This will involve wide consultation with the public and interested organisations at home and in our partner countries. I look forward to strong public participation in this process which will result in a clear set of priorities for the future direction of the programme.
I understand the Government intends to engage in public consultation on the White Paper on Irish Aid in the first quarter of 2012. In these times when so many of our people are struggling to cope with the austerity measures more than ever we need to demonstrate that Irish Aid is effective in getting aid to those who need it the most. This is a very important area for Ireland, one in which we have an extremely strong international reputation. We inherit a very honourable legacy which we need to protect. We need to maintain this and ensure we meet the millennium development goal of achieving a figure of 0.7% of GDP by 2015 which will be a big project ahead. AWEPA has referred to the issue of parliamentary oversight in the donor and recipient countries to ensure there is full parliamentary oversight of the money from when it is donated to when it is spent. The money can clearly be tracked all the way through. Does the Minister of State envisage parliaments having a critical role in showing that the money is getting to those who need it most?
The public consultation process will mainly take place in the early part of next year. I would certainly welcome any suggestions on how we can make sure the process is as inclusive as possible. If there are any suggestions from Deputies on the other side of the House, we would be very glad to take them on board, because we want to make sure this engages the Irish public. The Deputy is right. It is a lot of money at a time of austerity in this country, so we want to make sure people know exactly how the money is spent.
In respect of the Deputy's suggestion on AWEPA and parliamentary oversight, I presume he is talking about parliamentary oversight within our programme countries.
I am referring to both donor and programme countries.
We obviously support the concept fully and I would be happy to engage with our partner countries to ensure this. We already provide support for the strengthening of parliamentary systems and the various other civil society systems in our programme countries to ensure there is public participation. I would be happy to strengthen that in whatever way we can, including parliamentary oversight, and we would be happy to engage with our partner countries in that area.
We had the opportunity last week to engage with the Minister of State on the committee, and then with her colleagues Mr. Michael Gaffey at the AWEPA meeting. Is there room for conditionality on aid? This would mean the programme countries clearly meet acceptable international criteria on human rights. We are playing an important and constructive role in aid for Malawi, but there are significant concerns about human rights in that country at the moment. That is just one of many examples I could give. Does the Minister of State agree that we need conditionality?
We raise human rights issues constantly with our partner countries, either through Irish Aid officials or through Ministers and Ministers of State who visit, including myself. We will continue to do that. If we were to withdraw all our funding from a particular country due to human rights issues, then we would be depriving the poorest of the poor people in those countries. We need to make sure we know exactly where our money is going and if necessary, shift it into particular areas to ensure we have full oversight. We are constantly watching how we spend it. A big part of this is to ensure that how the money is spent is absolutely transparent. As we have a lot of influence in these countries due to our development programmes, we genuinely can influence change for the better and we have done this in many human rights areas. However, I would not be in favour of suddenly pulling out of a country completely, because that has a devastating effect on the most vulnerable people.
