Vol. 831 No. 2
1. Deputy Brendan Smith asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade the recent discussions he has had with the Northern Ireland Secretary of State or British Foreign Secretary in relation to the motions passed unanimously by Dáil Éireann requesting the British Government to release the papers and-or files pertaining to the Dublin-Monaghan bombings of 1974; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [8251/14]
The Dublin-Monaghan bombings of 17 May 1974 resulted in the death of 33 civilians and the wounding of almost 300 people, the highest number of casualties in any one day during the conflict known as the Troubles. The loyalist paramilitary group, the UVF, claimed responsibility for the bombings. There are various credible allegations that elements of British security forces colluded with the UVF in those bombings. The Oireachtas joint committee on justice called the attacks an act of international terrorism. In July 2008, the then Government Chief Whip, Pat Carey, moved a motion on this matter that had the unanimous support of all parties and individuals in this House and a similar motion was also passed in 2011. We are still awaiting a British response to those motions.
The 17th of May this year will mark the 40th anniversary of the Dublin-Monaghan bombings. With 33 killed, that terrible day saw the highest number of casualties on any single day during the Troubles. A further 300 people were injured. Many families across this island suffered terrible losses during the Troubles, including the Dublin-Monaghan families. I think of them today and of their ongoing loss.
On 11 May 2011, shortly after this Government took office, I met with members of Justice for the Forgotten, the organisation which, as part of the Pat Finucane Centre, provides support for victims of the Troubles in this jurisdiction, including the Dublin and Monaghan bombing families. The Taoiseach met with them subsequently on 18 July 2013. Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade and Department of the Taoiseach officials have also met with Justice for the Forgotten, most recently on 28 January in Brussels as part of a wider meeting with victims groups and on 31 January in Dublin. The Taoiseach and I have reiterated our support for the all-party Dáil motions of July 2008 and May 2011 urging the British Government to hand over all original documents in its possession relating to the bombings.
In a recent publication Lethal Allies, supported by the Pat Finucane Centre, links are alleged between those who carried out the Dublin-Monaghan bombings and those involved in a total of 120 deaths during the Troubles. These are serious allegations and I have asked to meet with the author of the book, Anne Cadwallader, and with Margaret Urwin of Justice for the Forgotten next month to discuss them in further detail. I am aware that Justice for the Forgotten addressed the Joint Committee on the Implementation of the Good Friday Agreement on 16 January 2014. I welcome this and the continued all-party support for its campaign on behalf of the Dublin-Monaghan families.
I have raised the matter of access to information related to the bombings with my ministerial counterparts in the British Government and will continue to do so. The Taoiseach has done likewise. The Government will continue to pursue the issue at ministerial and official level.
I thank the Tánaiste for his reply. Would he agree that the motions put forward and unanimously endorsed by all in this House in 2008 and 2011 requesting the British Government to allow access by an independent international judicial figure to all original documentation held by the British Government relating to the atrocities that occurred in this jurisdiction, and which were inquired into by Mr. Justice Barron, for the purposes of assessing said documents with the aim of assisting in the resolution of these crimes were reasonable requests? Unfortunately, as outlined in Anne Cadwallader's book those requests from this House have, in terms of the British Government's lack of response, fallen on deaf ears.
The Tánaiste will be aware that I recently had the opportunity to meet with Secretary of State Villiers and the Labour Party spokesperson Ivan Lewis, with whom I raised the need for the British Government to respond positively to the requests of this House. Mr. Justice Barron outlined in the very good work done by him in this regard in 2003 the clear collusion that occurred with some State security forces in assisting the UVF in those terrible atrocities.
I fully support the resolution which was passed unanimously by this House. The Government will continue to pursue that motion with the British authorities, as it has done to date. I should also mention that the issue of the Dublin-Monaghan bombings also needs to be considered in the context of the discussion on how to deal in a comprehensive manner with the past, which was the subject of the Haass talks prior to Christmas and which continues to be the subject of talks between the parties in Northern Ireland.
The Deputy will be aware that the proposals now under consideration by the Northern Ireland parties envisage the establishment of a historical investigations unit to take over Troubles-related death cases currently within the remit of the PSNI's historical inquiries team and the police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland. It also proposes the establishment in Northern Ireland of an independent commission for information retrieval to enable families seek and receive privately information about conflict related events. The commission could also, with the passing of some time, assess the presence of certain patterns or themes across conflict related cases. While these bodies would not have jurisdiction in the Irish State, there may be intended implications in what the Northern Ireland parties set in place for Ireland, which the Irish Government would have to consider carefully in due course. In this regard, I have already made known the Government's commitment to playing an active and constructive role in dealing with the past and encouraging agreement on a new architecture.
What is currently being discussed in Northern Ireland and the framework for the receipt of new information on Troubles-related cases clearly has implications for the Dublin-Monaghan bombings survivors.
I welcome the Tánaiste's comments. Would he agree that the Justice for the Forgotten, in particular Margaret Urwin and Anne Cadwallader, are doing excellent work in campaigning for truth and justice for the victims of the Dublin-Monaghan bombings and other atrocities, some of which occurred in my own constituency? It behoves all of us, coming up to the 40th anniversary of those atrocities, to try to ensure that the British Government responds positively to our requests. I know from all of the conversations I have had in meetings with the families of the victims that all they want is the truth. It is a very basic request for families who continue to suffer owing to the death of and serious injury caused to family members.
The Justice for the Forgotten group needs assistance to continue its work. I hope that the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade will be able to provide some financial support to this group, the work of which is important to so many families in this jurisdiction and north of the Border, families who understandably continue to grieve for the loss of loved ones.
As I said earlier, I have read Anne Cadwallader's book. I have met with some of the families of those about whom the book is written and I intend to meet shortly with Anne Cadwallader and Margaret Urwin.
I intend to continue to pursue the unanimous wish of this House for the provision of information with the British Government. I hope the arrangements that are now being discussed for dealing with the past will be helpful to us in that regard. I also intend to discuss with Ms Margaret Urwin the options open to her and her organisation to apply to my Department for funding.
2. Deputy Seán Crowe asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade if his attention has been drawn to the concerns surrounding the evacuation of Homs and the fact that the UN Human Rights Council has raised human rights concerns after some evacuees were detained; and if he has discussed this and the upcoming Geneva talks with his EU counterparts. [8272/14]
We have discussed the conflict in Syria on numerous occasions in this Chamber and at the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs and Trade. We are all aware of the huge destruction and the large number of human casualties this war has caused. There have been terrible injuries, deaths and poverty, and there are approximately 9 million refugees in need of humanitarian assistance. While we know the Geneva talks will not solve the issue overnight, I have asked this question to ascertain what was discussed at the last Foreign Affairs Council and the proposals, if any, arising from that.
I take seriously the concerns which have been raised about the well-being of detained evacuees from Homs. The tragedy of Homs, which is just one of a number of areas under siege in Syria, and the deprivation inflicted on its remaining population represent without doubt a crime under international humanitarian law.
Last week’s cynical and cowardly attack against the Homs humanitarian relief convoy, which killed 11 civilians and almost killed the UN country representative and his colleagues, underlines the inhumane conduct of this conflict. It is important to acknowledge the dedication and courage of those same UN staff, who again risked their lives to enter Homs shortly afterwards.
The UN and the International Committee of the Red Cross have also voiced concerns, which we share, about possible torture and mistreatment, and the possible misuse by the regime for either military or intelligence-gathering purposes of the evacuation efforts by the UN and the Syrian Arab Red Crescent. UN staff have sought to remain with those detained for their protection. I understand more than 200 of the male evacuees originally detained have now been released but some 180 continue to be questioned and processed by Syrian state agencies. I call for the immediate release of all those being held and for no further obstacles to the safe evacuation of those who wish to leave Homs.
The ongoing crisis in Syria and the Geneva II negotiations were discussed by the Foreign Affairs Council last week which I attended. Issues raised included the chemical weapons destruction programme; the prospect of a humanitarian resolution at the UN Security Council, which I have consistently called for and which now has full EU support; the renewal of the Geneva II negotiations; and the humanitarian crisis in Syria and across the region. All member states expressed concerns about the appalling impact of this crisis and a shared determination to support the Geneva II process.
Thankfully more than 1,400 people have been able to leave the old city of Homs. Many people would regard this as the first positive development arising from the Geneva II talks. The attack on the convoy should be condemned utterly. There is potential for some movement but there are clearly elements that do not want to see the innocent civilians who are trapped in Homs released.
The fact that the regime arrested and detained many men and boys who were leaving raises serious questions about the potential for further evacuations not only from Homs but also from other areas. There have some successful attempts in other areas. Is there anything the EU can do in this regard? I welcome that Ireland has stepped up to the plate in allocating additional funding. Can we outline our dismay over the arrest and detention of young men leaving the area? Is there any potential for raising the issue of detentions with the Syrian Government and others around the table at the Geneva II talks?
There are a number of issues here. First, we have the Geneva II talks. I regret that the talks have not made real progress towards the ending of the conflict. Opposition representatives have made constructive efforts to set out realistic principles for a roadmap to end the conflict and preserve the Syrian state.
From the statement issued by the Special Representative, Mr. Brahami, it is clear that the regime, with the support of its international backers, has refused to engage on the formation of a transitional governing body, one of the key elements of the Geneva communique. I urge the Syrian regime, led by President Assad, and its international supporters - particularly Russia and Iran - to change direction and to engage seriously to bring about a negotiated end to this horrific conflict.
The second issue is the siege at Homs, which I have already mentioned. Some 2,500 to 3,000 people were under siege in Homs, with approximately 250,000 people under siege across Syria, which is a major issue.
The third issue is humanitarian relief. On a per capita basis Ireland has been one of the biggest contributors to humanitarian aid and relief in Syria. The Minister of State, Deputy Costello, announced an additional allocation of €5 million this year, with approximately €26 million committed to the humanitarian effort in Syria to date. However, the problem is getting the humanitarian aid to those who need it. That is why we need a UN Security Council resolution, which we have been encouraging. Last week's Foreign Affairs Council collectively supported that. So there is a united European Union position to secure a UN Security Council resolution, which I hope can be progressed in order to provide better access for humanitarian aid to those who need it in Syria.
When we met the Iranian foreign affairs Minister and raised the issue of possible humanitarian corridors, he said there were discussions involving Iran, Turkey and some other countries in the region which would have credibility not only with the Syrian regime led by President Assad but also with the rebels. If we can get agreement from those countries in the surrounding area that have an interest in what is going on, perhaps we could build on that.
I welcome the funding the Government has given to humanitarian assistance, including the refugee issue in Syria and outside it. The EU has agreed to accept 30,000 Syrian refugees from Lebanon under the UNHCR refugee resettlement programme. However, the Government is only planning on accepting 90 of these refugees. While I understand the constraints under which we operate, which we see every day, is it possible for the Government to review this? Was the refugee crisis discussed at the Foreign Affairs Council meeting? While I welcome what we are doing in Syria and the neighbouring countries, is there more Ireland can do?
As the Deputy said, Ireland is taking some refugees. The issue of refugees is a matter for the Minister for Justice and Equality and I know he is keeping it under consideration. We need to recognise the scale of the problem here. Some 2 million people are in refugee camps in countries bordering Syria. It is on a scale at which the taking of refugees does not address the entire problem.
We have been concentrating on getting assistance to the refugees and humanitarian assistance into Syria and using our good offices to encourage a resolution of the conflict. It is essential that we continue the efforts to get Geneva II moving. Ultimately, the conflict has to be resolved through that process. In the meantime, it is urgent that humanitarian aid get through to the people who need it. The UN agencies must be enabled to do their work on issues such as the evacuation of Homs.
3. Deputy Maureen O'Sullivan asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade the reasons his Department did not consider reopening the embassy in Iran as part of the further openings announced; the criteria used to prioritise a country for a new embassy or reopening of an embassy previously closed; the costs, including expenses for having an honorary consul as opposed to a small embassy; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [8240/14]
My question relates to the criteria used for the reopening of embassies, the opening of new ones and the costs involved, with particular reference to an embassy in Iran.
Ireland’s diplomatic and consular network is at the forefront of efforts to promote our political and economic interests and values and in providing important services for the people and business community. Ireland’s diplomatic network comprises 56 embassies, seven multilateral missions and ten consulates general and other offices. This network will be further expanded as the new missions approved by the Government in January are set up this year. The configuration of the State’s diplomatic and consular network is kept under ongoing review by the Government. A range of factors are taken into account in considering our diplomatic representation overseas, including national political, economic and trade priorities, as well as the availability of resources. This question is also being considered in the context of the review of Ireland’s foreign policy and external relations being undertaken by my Department.
I can confirm that consideration was given to reopening the embassy in Tehran as part of the current expansion of our mission network. However, as I noted during my recent appearance before the Oireachtas Select Committee on Foreign Affairs and Trade to discuss my Department’s revised Estimates for 2014, the current resource constraints do not allow us to have resident representation in all of the locations that might objectively justify it having regard to political, economic and trade factors. The Government is conscious of the political, economic and trade factors that might warrant the opening of resident diplomatic missions in Iran and several other countries. We are conscious also that the change of government in Iran and the subsequent interim agreement on the nuclear issue hold out some promise for a general improvement in Iran’s international relations. The recent visit of a delegation to Tehran by the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs and Trade, in which the Deputy took part, was a recognition and encouragement of that trend.
As the Deputy will probably be aware from her recent visit, my Department appointed an Honorary Consul of Ireland in Tehran in June 2012. Honorary consuls receive an honorarium of €1,125 per annum and are allowed to retain half of the consular fees they collect for the services they provide such as visa or passport applications and the authentication of documents. The costs of providing an honorary consular service are obviously considerably lower than operating a resident diplomatic mission. However, honorary consular representation is of a fundamentally different nature from diplomatic representation and I do not consider it to be a substitute for a resident diplomatic presence.
Would it not have been more logical to wait for the completion of the review of our foreign policy and then to decide which embassies would reopen and where new embassies would be established? I am delighted that the Vatican embassy will reopen, but the criterion in that regard was the fight against global hunger and poverty, which is wonderful. Is this part of the strategy for all embassies? As the Minister acknowledged, Deputies Seán Crowe, Eric Byrne and I visited Iran as part of a delegation recently. Many of us, in particular Government Deputies, were regretful about the closure of the embassy there. It was said that had been done for economic reasons and the impression was given that it would only be a matter of time before it was reopened. We were only back one week when the list of embassy openings and reopenings was announced, with no mention of Iran. The timing was bad in this regard.
We have a small footprint compared to other countries in respect of our representation abroad. I have expressed the wish to have it expanded, but because we have a small footprint, we have to change it on a continuing basis, as our needs and demands change. The Deputy asked why we could not wait until after the review of foreign policy had been completed. A number of reviews are under way. For example, the review of trade, tourism and investment has been completed and makes it clear that we need to have a greater presence in South-East Asia where we are under represented, South America, Africa arising from our Africa strategy and the United States.
With regard to the timing of the announcement, rotation of diplomatic missions occurs in the summer and, therefore, decisions must be made early in the year. If we did not do so this year, nothing would be implemented until the early part of 2015. For a variety of reasons, including the trade imperative in a number of countries and the review of the millennium development goals which the Deputy mentioned, it is necessary to move on changing the missions now.
There are concerns among NGOs about the balance between human rights issues and promoting our trade and economic interests. The Minister referred to diplomatic representation being about upholding our values. We went on a trade mission to Iran and there was no difficulty in discussing human rights issues, whether it was the death penalty or conditions in prisons and for prisoners. Human rights must be part of the brief of any delegation that travels abroad, although not in an intrusive, lecturing or hectoring way. However, these issues must be on the agenda in order that we continue to fulfil our commitments on human rights.
This country has a strong record and reputation internationally for the promotion of human rights and we will maintain this. The promotion of human rights operates in tandem with our trade work. Trade agreements signed by the European Union have a human rights dimension; therefore, we give huge attention to the promotion of human rights in our work on the Human Rights Council.
Iran, the subject of the Deputy's question, is very much on our radar. The location of missions will be kept under review. We considered Iran as part of the latest review and it will be considered in future reviews.
4. Deputy Brendan Smith asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade his Department’s strategy in achieving the 0.7% GNP target for overseas development aid by 2015 as outlined in the programme for Government 2011; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [8252/14]
The policy on international development, One World One Future, is a good strategy and, as the Minister of State, Deputy Joe Costello, stated at a meeting of the Select Committee on Foreign Affairs and Trade to discuss the Department's Estimates, builds on the 2006 White Paper on Irish Aid, rightly emphasising the importance of development co-operation as a central feature of our foreign policy and reputation abroad. One of the reasons we are committed as a country to a substantial overseas development aid, ODA, programme is we believe a stable, fair and equal global community is in our interests as a nation. In some ways, overseas aid is the price we pay for a global system in which small countries such as Ireland can thrive. I hope the Minister of State can assure us about his commitment to reaching the target set.
I can. The Government is strongly committed to Ireland’s overseas aid programme and its place at the heart of Irish foreign policy. This commitment was made clear in the programme for Government and underscored last year in our new policy on international development, One World One Future. The policy sets out our vision for a sustainable and just world in which people are empowered to overcome poverty and hunger and fully realise their rights and potential. It focuses particularly on the poorest countries and communities in sub-Saharan Africa and sets out three goals: reduced hunger and stronger resilience; sustainable development and inclusive economic growth; and better governance, human rights and accountability. It provides a clear framework for the prioritisation of activities and the allocation of resources across six priority areas for action deriving from these goals.
Despite the severe economic and budgetary situation we have faced, the Government has clearly demonstrated its determination since coming into office to maintain and stabilise the budget for Irish ODA to the maximum extent. We provided overall budgets for development assistance of €657 million, €629 million and €622 million for the years 2011, 2012 and 2013, respectively. The Government has again managed to allocate almost €600 million in ODA in 2014. On current estimates, this should amount to 0.43% of GNP. Given all the circumstances, this represents a significant achievement, reflecting the commitment of the people to the fight to end extreme poverty and hunger. The Government remains committed to making further progress towards reaching the UN target for ODA of 0.7% of GNP. We will do so as soon as economic circumstances permit.
Like Deputy Seán Crowe, I welcome the recent announcement of the further allocation of funding for Syria and the adjoining region. I take the opportunity to emphasise again the need for assistance for the region, although I fully understand there are many competing demands. Am I correct in thinking the Minister of State said the percentage of GNP spent this year on overseas development aid will be 0.43%? I gather that last year the figure was 0.47%. Is the Minister of State saying the commitment given in the programme for Government will not be honoured?
The Deputy is correct, the projected figure for this year is 0.43%. The actual outturn last year was 0.46%, not 0.47%. There has been a 4% decrease this year and a slight percentage decrease each year. This has been in the context of the downturn in the economy, the bailout programme, the troika and the attempt to achieve national recovery. There was a commitment given in the programme for Government to try to reach the 0.7% target by 2015. The new policy document we have published states this target remains but that it will be reached when economic circumstances permit.
The measurement of our overseas development aid is dependent on national income. There are always competing demands, even in good times, for increased expenditure and we must manage expectations in other areas in which there is public expenditure. I appeal to the Minister of State in this regard. Is the percentage based on national income? I would prefer if the Minister of State were more positive and clear in his commitment to the achievement of the programme for Government target of 0.7% by 2015. I fully appreciate that there are always competing demands and that we can have strategies, but we need targets for actual expenditure, as well as the lofty aspirations to which we all commit.
Overseas development aid had been increasing quite rapidly before the crisis and the difficulties we experienced in 2008, at which stage there was a sharp decline, as the Deputy is aware, of almost one third in 2008 and 2009. What we have done during our three years in government has stabilised overseas development aid. There has been a slight percentage decrease each year in line with economic circumstances. Nevertheless, we have maintained it at a high level and are still well above the average in moving towards the 0.7% target. Certainly, we are keen, as we have stated in our policy document, to move towards improving the position. I emphasise that we have managed to maintain all projects and funding for non-governmental organisations and there has not been any serious undermining of any of the country programmes in place.
5. Deputy Seán Crowe asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade if his attention has been drawn to the significant rise in poppy cultivation in Afghanistan in view of the fact that this opiate often ends up in the EU; the proposals he and his EU counterparts have to tackle this growing threat; his views on whether this necessitates stronger co-operation with governments in the region, including Iran; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [8273/14]
As the Tánaiste may be aware, the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime has reported that the level of poppy cultivation in Afghanistan rose to a new high of more than 200,000 ha in 2013, a 36% increase on the figure for last year. This is an area approximately 283 times the size of Phoenix Park. If I was to stand in the middle of a field, it would be as far as the eye could see and further. The 2013 figure represents the highest total ever in poppy cultivation in Afghanistan and the United Nations estimates that total production reached approximately 5,500 tonnes. Since much of this opiate reaches Ireland and elsewhere in Europe, what plans does the Government and the European Union have to stop this record crop from reaching and destroying our communities?
I am aware of the report of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, UNODC, to which the Deputy refers. The UNODC 2013 drugs report indicates a worrying increase, of up to 36%, in poppy cultivation in Afghanistan, some of which, as the Deputy suggested, will almost inevitably end up in the European Union and Ireland. We are all aware of the challenging transition Afghanistan is undergoing, a transition taking place in a volatile security and political environment. The European Union is devising a new partnership strategy for engagement in Afghanistan post-2014. This is part of an overall regional and international effort that aims to support Afghanistan in its transition to democracy - this effort has an emphasis on respect for human rights and the rule of law - and in its transition to a healthy economic model by moving away from dependence on the narco-economy. Regional co-operation in dealing with this issue is essential, as is the strengthening of border controls. Key partners such as Iran have an important role to play and the United Nations and the European Union continue to provide funding and technical assistance to help transit countries and neighbouring states. The new European Union strategy will also aim to assist the Afghan Government to create new alternative livelihoods for Afghans currently engaged in poppy production. Saffron, for example, is a particularly high value alternative crop which may offer some potential in this regard.
The Deputy will be aware that poppy cultivation, while perhaps providing a lucrative livelihood for the few, also hurts the many engaged in its cultivation, production and distribution. It is estimated that approximately 1 million Afghans are addicted to heroin, a product derived from the poppy plant. Moreover, drug trafficking has established links with other forms of organised crime, corruption, terrorism and human exploitation, creating a vicious economic circle.
I imagine the Deputy will agree that the European demand for drugs is part of the problem that needs to be addressed, with the issue of supply. The European Union policy on reducing drug supply and demand is set out in the EU drugs strategy 2013-20. Our national drug strategy which is based on the same principles focuses on the five pillars of supply reduction, prevention, treatment, rehabilitation and research.
The issues to which the Deputy refers are the subject of ongoing discussions in the European Union and other international fora. At EU level, these issues are dealt with through the relevant European Union Council working parties such as the Asia Oceania working party, COASI, as well as the horizontal working party on drugs. At a broader multilateral level, the Paris pact initiative is an international partnership aimed at combatting Afghan opiates trafficking, consumption and related problems in countries along the Afghan opiates trafficking routes. The United Nations General Assembly special session on illicit drugs is scheduled to take place in New York in September 2016.
Fully 70% of the world's heroin comes from Afghanistan. Many Members are familiar with the effects of heroin and we have all stood at too many graves and attended too many funerals as a result of the effects of the drug. I am old enough to remember the cheap heroin on the streets of Dublin and I am concerned that this will happen again. The Minister of State has referred to ongoing discussions and said we are looking at a strategy and so on. However, I do not get any sense of urgency. In recent years the poppy cultivation problem has got bigger and bigger and many countries in the region are keen to work with the European Union. The Iranian Minister has said he is keen to work with it. A policy was in place in that regard, but it is not happening now. Will the Minister of State give the House some sense that there is urgency in addressing this matter? Will the Government reflect that urgency and start to do something concrete and constructive in respect of the potential problem coming down the track into this city?
The situation is probably worse than the Deputy indicated. Up to 75% of the entire world’s illicit opium production comes from the area in question. It reached a peak in 2012, surpassing the ten-year high recorded in 2007. It is expected to continue to grow.
The European Union, the United States, the World Bank and the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization are putting in place programmes to support the cultivation of alternative crops to poppy production. I referred earlier to the cultivation of saffron, as well as rose oil, a high-value export product, and grapes. The strategy is to provide for high-value alternatives to undermine the production of opium.
Thank you, Minister.
We supported, through funding, the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime's illicit drugs trafficking programme for Iran as, geographically, it is a major transit country for opium. Unfortunately, Iran has made the death penalty the normal sanction for anyone convicted of drug-related offences. In that context, we have had little choice but to remove our support for that particular programme.
We all oppose the death penalty for those involved in drug trafficking. However, I imagine it might be popular not only in this city but in other parts of the State.
The Minister referred to the alternative crops strategy. Will we examine this problem with a new sense of urgency? As he stated, 75% of the world supply of heroin comes from the region in question. Will there be a strong voice from the EU on tackling this problem? That is the message of hope we want to send out as there is the potential for another wildfire spread of heroin addiction across the country.
The European Union is cognisant of the problem that has been caused by illegal poppy cultivation and that three quarters of world opium production occurs in Afghanistan. We are also aware of the conflict there and the difficulties in dealing with poppy production in those circumstances. Substantial programmes are being put in place to deal with this issue with the European Union leading them, as well as the World Bank and the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization. The only way to deal effectively with the supply side is by providing alternative crops that will give an equal return. There are hundreds of thousands of small farmers producing poppy all over Afghanistan. We have a responsibility ourselves to deal with demand.
