JOINT COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS debate -
Thursday, 15 Jul 2004

Dóchas: Presentation

Chairman

I am pleased to welcome a delegation from Dóchas which includes Ms Caoimhe de Barra from Trócaire and Mr. Colin Roche of Oxfam. Present in the gallery are Mr. Hans Zomer, director of Dóchas, Mr. Oisin Coghlan of Christian Aid and Mr. Robert Downes of Bóthar.

Dóchas is an umbrella organisation of Irish non-governmental organisations. It performs valuable work by providing a forum for consultation and Cooperation among such organisations and helping to build consensus among its members on development issues. The subjects of today's presentation are the level of resources to be allocated in next year's Estimates for development assistance and the issue of progression toward the UN aid target of 0.7% of GNP. For many years, Ireland has aspired to achieve the UN target and steady growth in overseas development aid funding took place during the 1990s. Funding increased from 0.16% of GNP in 1992 to 0.41% by 2002 at which level it has remained. The expected figure of €480 million this year represents a trebling of total overseas development aid over seven years. This unprecedented expansion has meant that in percentage terms Ireland is ranked the seventh largest donor internationally per head of population and well above the EU average. In the Monterey commitment, the EU set an aid target of 0.39% of GDP by 2006, which Ireland has already superseded. Ireland plans to increase its rate of contribution further.

Members will be aware that a specific timeframe for achieving the UN target was first set in September 2000 when the Government announced its decision to reach it by the end of 2007. We are all familiar with the global economic downturn of the last couple of years the effects of which have been felt across all sectors of the Irish economy. While this has resulted in a number of cuts in particular areas, it is crucial that significant progress toward achieving a rate of 0.7% is made in the forthcoming Estimates and budget. The presentation by Dóchas will set out the rationale of its members for a multi-annual plan to achieve the goal of 0.7% of GNP for overseas aid. Concerns about the impact of the proposed relocation of the Development Cooperation Ireland to Limerick will also be addressed.

Before we commence, I remind delegates that while members are covered by privilege, witnesses appearing before it are not so covered.

Senator Norris

I wish to make a slight correction. I have worked with Mr. Oisin Coghlan on a number of occasions and do not see him here. Perhaps the Clerk could ascertain who is representing Christian Aid. I apologise as I will have to leave in approximately 15 minutes to attend an interview in RTE. I would like to be here and I do not mean any discourtesy.

Chairman

I understand that Oisin Coghlan was to have attended in the public gallery, but has not been able to get here. We can check who is here and include the name in the minutes.

Mr. Colin Roche

I thank the committee for inviting us to attend to make a presentation on the relocation of Development Cooperation Ireland and the aid budget. I spoke to Mr. Coghlan earlier and he sends his apologies. While he is not in attendance, the rest of the delegation is here. I will speak on the relocation of Development Cooperation Ireland after Caoimhe De Barra deals with the aid budget.

Ms Caoimhe De Barra

I thank the committee for the privilege of addressing it on the aid budget. In response to the Chairman's introduction, Dóchas recognises the expansion in overseas development aid which has occurred over the last number of years. There has been an improvement not only in the quantity of aid but in its quality and in the strategic direction Development Cooperation Ireland has taken, particularly since the Ireland Aid review was completed a few years ago. As non-governmental organisations, we find Development Cooperation Ireland to be highly professional with a very clear strategic focus. Above all else, the body has a very clear focus on poverty.

Ireland has been very successful mainly as a result of its clear commitment to an aid level of 0.7% of GDP as set out in the programme for Government and a Government decision of 2000. Ireland has become an international leader on the basis of its commitment to achieve this goal by 2007 as a result of which it was able to protect the poverty focus in the draft EU constitution. Poverty reduction as an objective of the European Union was in danger at one point but Ireland managed to maintain it which we very much welcome. Development Cooperation Ireland and the Department of Foreign Affairs in general have done a tremendous job in defending the poverty reduction objective in development.

The decision to adopt a target of 0.7% of GDP by 2007 has meant that Ireland has attained great status internationally but this may be endangered if we fail to continue the progress. As we are all aware of how the decision was taken and of the interim target of 0.5% which was set for 2002 but not yet achieved, I will not discuss the matters in detail. To reach the target of 0.7% by 2007, we have clear budgetary requirements. We need to add an average of €150 million per year to the current budget, a level which is in reach given the recent indications of economic improvement.

Having passed on the Presidency, we must now consider developments in the coming year which will be critical for overseas development aid. There will be at least four major events at which the international commitment to overseas development will be in the spotlight. The first of these will be the UN stocktake on the millennium development goals which is scheduled for September or October 2005. In preparation for the UN stocktake, Ireland and the other member states of the European Union will submit a report on our commitment to and fulfilment of the millennium development goals, including, but not limited to, the level of overseas development aid delivered. This initiative resulted from the Irish Presidency. At the April meeting of the General Affairs and External Relations Council, Ireland proposed and achieved an agreement that the Commission would lead in gathering and compiling reports from each member state on fulfilment of the millennium development goals. The reports will form an input into the global report on the development goals.

A high-level UN dialogue on financing for development will take place later in 2005 — probably November — to consider how states are fulfilling their commitments on overseas development aid, debt and trade. There will also be an examination of the commitments of developing countries on governance and the manner in which they are managing development processes. An interesting initiative is bound to arise when the United Kingdom chairs the G8 meeting and firmly promotes the international financing facility for development. This will focus the media spotlight and political attention on the question of overseas development aid and the way countries are fulfilling their promises.

It was announced initially at the UN millennium summit in 2000 that Ireland would achieve the target of 0.7% of GDP by 2007 and repeated several times, including on the occasion of the Taoiseach's visit to the General Assembly last September. We feel that with all of the attention being devoted to ODA at the UN among other fora next year, we will need to be very clear that Ireland's commitment to 0.7% by 2007 is rock solid and that there will be no rowing back on that commitment.

The Estimates for 2005 are critical in that if we do not send a very clear signal that Ireland is on track to reach the target of 0.7% by 2007 we will suffer in terms of our international credibility and Ireland will squander a lot of the political capital it has made in recent years. Dóchas believes the Minister for Foreign Affairs should reach an agreement with the Minister for Finance on a multiannual funding arrangement for ODA for the following three years in order to reach the 0.7% target. This would be a reinstatement of the multiannual agreement which was initially reached in 2000. We believe this is the way forward. We are supported in this by the OECD's development assistance committee for whom this was the major recommendation in its November 2003 report. We request that the committee would consider making this recommendation to the Minister for Foreign Affairs.

Mr. Roche

As members are aware, the Minister for Finance announced a programme of decentralisation in the last budget, which included the relocation of DCI to Limerick. It was proposed to relocate two elements of the Department of Foreign Affairs from their current locations; the Passport Office and Development Cooperation Ireland. Development Cooperation Ireland was the only division proposed for movement outside the capital.

In June, Dóchas, as the representative body for development NGOs in Ireland, wrote to the Minister for Foreign Affairs and his colleague the Minister for Finance outlining its concerns in regard to the proposed relocation of DCI to Limerick. In the letter we noted the concerns expressed in the report of the Flynn decentralisation implementation group regarding the efficacy of civil servants in a decentralised environment. We included information based on research conducted by an independent consultant on behalf of Dóchas into how the decentralisation process could affect the workings of DCI.

I will outline a number of those concerns for the committee. The research pointed to a concern in regard to marginalisation. Decentralisation would mean DCI would operate separately from the rest of the Department of Foreign Affairs which would remain in Dublin. We raised the issue of coherence with other Oireachtas committees, including the Joint Committee on Enterprise and Small Business. The proposal to move to Limerick would not promote coherence. As things stand, it is difficult to operate in a coherent fashion in the Department to ensure that development Cooperation is integrated into departmental policy. That is one major concern for us; that there may be political marginalisation of the development division with the Department of Foreign Affairs and the broader structures of Government.

The proposal runs counter to the Ireland Aid review, which was chaired by Deputy O'Donnell who was then Minister of State at the Department. The head of Development Cooperation Ireland, Mr. David O'Donoghue, recently reported on the implementation of the Ireland Aid review to the sub-committee on development Cooperation. A number of options were examined in the review, including the "agencisation" of the division but it was decided that DCI should remain part of the Department of Foreign Affairs and that a number of other agencies should be integrated into it, such as APSO which had operated as a separate organisation. The proposal to relocate to Limerick runs against both the spirit and the tone of the Ireland Aid review.

In the very short term there are serious concerns about whether the Department will be able to retain the specialist staff it has recruited in recent years. There is a great need in Development Cooperation Ireland to have specialist staff to deal with the complex problems which arise, including HIV-AIDS, education, etc. We are dealing with critical topics for people in the developing world. It is vital these people be retained and that other specialists can be recruited when the need arises. Research that has been conducted gives rise to serious concerns about our ability to do that. In addition, one of the recommendations of the Ireland Aid review was the mainstreaming of development within the Department and, for example, the rotation of departmental staff into the section to ensure expertise in development is shared more broadly in the Department. The relocation to Limerick gives rise to serious concerns as to whether this could take place in a changed environment.

In the short term, the move would disrupt the work of DCI. It would be difficult for it to retain its focus on the task in hand if involved in relocation to Limerick. Most development NGOs are based in Dublin. We have good and cordial relations with DCI and work closely with it through a number of programmes. The research gives rise to concern as to how that would continue if DCI were moved to Limerick. Would it be possible for smaller NGOs with less resources to maintain the links they currently have with DCI?

These are some of the key points. I hope members have a copy of the letter. We will also furnish the committee with a copy of the final research report when it is available.

Senator Mooney

I appreciate that other members wish to get involved. I endorse the Chairman's welcome for this important grouping of NGOs. I am very grateful for their presentations. I will not dwell too much on the paper presented about overseas development expenditure, other than to say that I think I would speak for everybody in saying I will encourage the Government to continue to publicly state its commitment to ensuring it will reach the target of 0.7% of GDP by 2007. I have every faith and confidence in the Government's commitment in that regard, although I appreciate that from the perspective of the NGOs it is important to keep repeating the point.

I wish to focus on the second paper. I am somewhat surprised that NGOs are getting involved in this area. Notwithstanding the paper that was put forward or the copy of the letter sent to the Minister, Deputy Cowen, it appears to me that much of what is involved is questionable to say the least. Who undertook the research? An independent consultant was referred to. What was his or her mandate and brief? Was it to start off on an anti-decentralisation basis and to frame the conclusion accordingly?

At a more specific level, I am curious to know how often NGO personnel go to Iveagh House? Regarding specialisation, surely the whole raison d’être of the expertise that is available to the Department of Foreign Affairs is about rotation rather than relocation. That is part and parcel of what it does. To suggest, as the paper does, that somehow there will be a loss of expertise and specialised knowledge as a result of moving 120 miles to Limerick beggars belief. In the context of a development specialisation within the diplomatic stream and greater interchange of staff, I cannot understand why there would be any difficulty in that regard. There is a constant interchange of staff between sections and specialised knowledge within the Department of Foreign Affairs. People are brought back to Iveagh House from all parts of the world after having spent a period abroad and then sent out again. Quite frankly, I have no sympathy whatsoever with this paper. If I came from Limerick, I would be astonished if a very credible organisation such as that of the delegates, which carries out very valuable work, were not more focused on ensuring that it gets more funding than on whether there is to be decentralisation.

Senator Norris

I am very grateful to the Chairman for allowing me to contribute now as I have to leave soon and particularly because I disagree strongly with Senator Mooney on this issue. Regarding the first presentation, I believe a medium-sized bouquet is due to the Government. It should have continued increasing all the time. At least it did not go backwards and this is a positive step. I agree absolutely with Caoimhe De Barra that a firm commitment to an annualised, agreed increase is necessary. This committee should support that proposal.

We are always talking about troubled financial times but then we find €100 million here and €500 million there that people did not pay in their taxes. The Government could easily afford the increase. A sum of €480 million is a pinprick in budgetary terms. If we argue that we are interested in a pragmatic political gains rather than the alleviation of suffering, there is a very strong case for our making this increase because we would then gain, for a trifling amount of money in comparative terms, a real moral stature which could be used politically in various ways. I urge that this committee continue to advocate this proposal. I am not being critical of the Government in any sense and am saying it is entitled to a medium-sized bouquet. This committee, which is non-party, has a duty to support strongly the work that has been done by various good Ministers of this Administration.

The second presentation was extremely interesting. The witnesses are perfectly entitled to express their views in this debate. The kind of argument made has been made by completely independent analysts outside the political scheme and therefore let us not suggest that it was commissioned and that those involved were given a brief to conclude what they concluded. To suggest otherwise involves a very serious slur on the consultants. No reputable group of consultants would accept such a brief and they would kick it out straight away. That is not how things work here. It may be the case with Hutton and Butler but not with others. No decent consultant would behave in the manner described and I do not believe they did so in this case.

The Department of Foreign Affairs is cute enough to stay on St. Stephen's Green. One will not find it going to Limerick despite the fact that my own roots are half way down to Limerick. I love the city, I have no distaste for it and often visit it. We need not pretend that this is a Dublin-centric matter. Let the Department of Foreign Affairs go to Limerick if it is so wonderful and if it believes it is the most efficient place from which to run foreign policy. Off with it to Limerick.

It is not just a question of funding. Senator Mooney, who is a good friend of mine and for whom I have the highest regard, said Dóchas should be more interested in funding. It should not. It should be interested in efficiency. One can throw hundreds of millions of euro at people but if they do not spend it efficiently one is wasting one's money. This is why Dóchas is 100% correct to bring this important matter before the committee.

When we enter this room, we shed our party affiliations. What we are interested in is the welfare of people who are marginalised all over the world. I am not really suggesting that Senator Mooney was making political points but I urge people to consider this matter on its merits.

Senator Mooney

I am not making a political point. It is about the media and everybody else being in Dublin. I do not come from Dublin and I have a different perspective.

Senator Norris

The Senator said he does not come from Dublin. I made it perfectly clear I was not accusing the Senator of making a partisan political point.

Chairman

We know the high regard Senator Norris has for Senator Mooney.

Senator Mooney

It is reciprocated, I might add.

Senator O’Rourke

The Senators should have a love-in.

Senator Norris

No, we are not even engaged yet. The issue needs to be taken seriously because it concerns the efficiency and systematic running of this very valuable organisation.

On communication, I know people who go in and out of Iveagh House, such as Mr. Tom Highland. The connections between all the NGOs are essential and they comprise an organic structure. I am a lousy gardener because I cannot bear to see a plant without digging it up every so often to see how the roots are doing. This invariably kills it. That is the kind of procedure taking place at present. It should certainly be questioned, not because we feel we are involved in a major debate and want to undermine the plans of the Minister for Finance, Deputy McCreevy. That is a bigger, different debate.

Senator Mooney

That was not my point either.

Senator Norris

I never said it was.

Senator Mooney

The Senator should not throw it into the pot then.

Senator Norris

I am saying we need to examine the essential elements of this particular matter, bearing in mind that those in the driving seat have said relocation may do damage to their efficiency. They have not spoken about their comfort or whether their children are in school or Blackrock College, etc. We ought to take this very seriously indeed.

Senator O’Rourke

I regret I was a few minutes late and I thank both Caoimhe de Barra and Colin Roche for attending. I was particularly interested in Ms de Barra'spoints about the increase in funding. I remember being at Cabinet when there were raging arguments about that matter. As it turned out, they were all very fruitful. I have every belief that the Taoiseach will concede to the setting of the target and expand it if he can. He has made the commitment very publicly on several occasions. The UN was mentioned and I take Ms de Barra's point on the budget projections, which she has printed in her document. They represent the road I am sure we will travel.

It is important that a small country such as Ireland be recognised as one of the leading donors. This country has always looked outwards and sent people away, sadly on some occasions and often gladly. It was an island that looked out to the world.

The point was made that 2005 is the crucial year in which the leap must be taken if we are to fulfil the commitment regarding the promised aid. All of us, including the Chairman, will certainly be making our feelings known to ensure that commitment is met. We will monitor the matter closely.

Mr. Roche gave an interesting summary of his position, with which I was very struck. Let there be no doubt that he has every entitlement to make his point — I am a firm believer in free speech. However, I must state, in a non-political sense, that I am a strong supporter of decentralisation. I am not saying so to praise the Minister for Finance, Deputy McCreevy, the Taoiseach or any such person. Mr. Roche stated many Dóchas members would be in favour of decentralisation as a concept in so far as it involves the devolution of power and regional development. These are very proper and are exactly what constitute the ideals of decentralisation. Therefore, when I make my points, Mr. Roche should note that I am not making them in a harsh way but just stating how I feel DCI would benefit from decentralisation.

Mr. Roche is speaking as if the comfort blanket of the Department of Foreign Affairs will be lost to him because he will no longer meet many people and other groups through the portals. I think the opposite is the case. When DCI moves to Limerick, it will be established with a much stronger identity than it has at present as part of a much larger building and organisation at the Department of Foreign Affairs. The Department has as its main business the way we treat the world and are treated by it and various other mandarin issues which arise on a daily basis, which is not to run it down but rather to make clear it has important business to do.

Likewise, the work of DCI is important because how we treat and effectively help the disadvantaged of the world involves a moral duty. DCI would be in a far stronger and more independent position with its own section of a Department, its own identity and its own place in Ireland, namely, Limerick. These are strong conceptual advantages which would accrue to Dóchas and the bodies represented by it, including Oxfam. The Government is not pushing the point, which I have made strongly, that there are advantages, which are not immediately apparent, to being quasi-independent and at a physical remove from the main section of a Department.

Mr. Roche stated that he has concerns about the efficacy of the Civil Service in a decentralised world. However, the Civil Service in a decentralised world will rise to challenge and opportunity, which it would perhaps not do when smaller sections of Departments are swamped by larger ones. I know about this issue because 30 years ago, 300 civil servants from the Department of Education and Science moved to Athlone and five or six years ago, another 200 or 300 moved there. I have seen the young women and men, as they were then, blossoming under the responsibilities they were given to make their sections of the Department work. The freedom of expression they have enjoyed from being in a decentralised location is quite amazing. Eventually, such people get promotion opportunities through their added responsibility, all of which amounts to significant pluses in a decentralised system.

I agree with Senator Norris that Limerick is a very fine city and place in which to live. I am trying to give the committee my genuine feelings and experiences. When people debate decentralisation, I want to point out that the world does not begin and end in Dublin. The fact that Senator Mooney and I are from the country does not give us this point of view as we spend three quarters of our week in Dublin and are very happy and honoured to do so as Senators. However, there are other locations and significant opportunities which do not involve Dublin writ large.

With the increased aid budget I hope for and the independence that would confer, I can see DCI growing apace with its own segment of the Department of Foreign Affairs in Limerick — it will be DCI, Limerick. So what about the carpets, the chandeliers and the grand staircases. DCI is concerned with giving to and helping the disadvantaged, which is also what concerns this committee. The staff in DCI are bright people and I hope they will re-consider their views, as I am sure they will.

Deputy Carey

I welcome the representatives of Dóchas to the committee. They are pushing an open door by asking the committee for its endorsement of the 0.7% target. We had this discussion in the absence of Dóchas at the Estimates meeting two weeks ago. There is a clear desire on the part of the Minister of State, Deputy Kitt, to achieve that objective, if at all possible, by 2007. However, a number of members, including myself, indicated how difficulty that will be as it will involve persuasion and advocacy at the Cabinet table. Unfortunately, we have stalled in recent years, therefore, we now have to make up significant tranches. Nonetheless, I believe that we should wholeheartedly endorse the recommendation and request from Dóchas that the ODA budget sticks to its original targets for 2007. There will be debates about whether the money should be spent on a classroom or a hospital bed in Ireland or a worthwhile project in one of our target countries. It will be for us to argue the case on behalf of the ODA budget.

Like Senator O'Rourke, I do not object to DCI raising the issue of decentralisation, although it was not on the agenda which was circulated. However, I would have thought that among the last organisations to raise the issue would have been the NGOs. I would have thought that the raison d’être of non-governmental and voluntary organisations includes notions of sustainability, community development and the other principles the organisations promote in the countries in which they work. Some of the organisations which I presume are associated with Dóchas are based outside Dublin. I do not think Bóthar or Self Help Ireland are based in Dublin and, unless, I am very much mistaken, Trócaire has moved to Maynooth. Therefore, it is possible for an organisation to do significant work in their local communities.

Like Senator O'Rourke, I believe that DCI has the capacity to do a significant amount of work in the Shannon-Limerick region. It is not a barren desert because the area has three universities — in Limerick, Galway and Cork — as well as two or three institutes of technology, some of which already teach modules closely associated with the kind of work DCI does. DCI should be standing on its own. It is located in Bishop Square at present — thankfully away from the mandarins in Iveagh House.

Senator O’Rourke

And the chandeliers.

Deputy Carey

DCI needs independence and a distance, intellectually and otherwise, because the Department at large can be constraining on its development. I have met many DCI workers in the past year and a half and acknowledge that they are not archetypal civil servants, nor should they be. They are inclined to be radical in the best sense of the word, they challenge the system and they promote governance systems in Africa, South America and elsewhere. The Chairman, myself and others were in São Paolo recently with a DCI representative and saw the work that development organisations are doing there among the poorest of the poor.

As well as DCI making a contribution abroad, intellectually and conceptually it can make a significant contribution in Ireland. Limerick is one of the places it could do so, although it could also do it in Galway or Cork. I do not see any reason DCI ought not to be based in Limerick and there are many reasons it should be based in a region. DCI strikes me as one of those organisations which can contribute significantly to the development of a region. I do not dispute the organisations' right to challenge the thinking behind the programme. However, DCI is one of the few bodies which I feel strongly could move to a region, become more independent and grow, vitalise the immediate community, influence thinking about community development issues, promote the development of further voluntary organisations, try to break down the thinking that everything has to be in Dublin and improve the notion of regional government. These are strongly held opinions of mine. Others are entitled to their opinions.

Senator Kitt

I welcome the delegation and support its proposal to work towards contributing 0.7% of GNP by 2007. At our sub-committee we had a presentation from Dóchas and we supported the proposal. We have stalled on our contributions over the last three years but the Taoiseach has given a commitment and I hope he will honour it. This is not just about money. The trade and development issues we have discussed and our visits to projects in different countries are also important. Education and health are important issues. Many emergency issues, such as the situation in Sudan, receive much publicity but we must be conscious of education issues in providing overseas development assistance.

I am glad Mr. Roche is in favour of decentralisation as a concept, as I am. I am of the view that DCI could make a contribution everywhere in the country. We are talking about Limerick. Deputy Carey mentioned the connections with the University of Limerick and other parts of the mid-west. That is important.

Twenty years ago, when I was a member of the Committee of Public Accounts, it was proposed to decentralise part of the Department of Social Welfare to Sligo. The argument against this was that the technology at the time would not allow it. Technology has caught up with us now, however, and there are offices of the Department of Social and Family Affairs in Sligo, Letterkenny and Longford. Examples were given of the Department of Education and Science, whose building section is in Tullamore and special needs section is in Athlone. These sections can deal effectively with particular issues and I think DCI will also be very effective in Limerick.

As I said, I am glad Mr. Roche supports decentralisation and I do not see how it could be other than a success in Limerick. We must agree on our level of ODA contributions by 2007. We should emphasise the educational projects that should be a focus of our programme.

Deputy G. Mitchell

I apologise for being late. With my new responsibilities in Brussels, I got home very late last night. The only issue I spoke about in Brussels when Mr. Barroso presented himself was development aid.

I was surprised that responsible development aid bodies did not raise an issue which I have raised with Dóchas before. The involvement of AfrI, a development aid organisation, in the Nice referendum was an appalling and scandalous intrusion into a public debate. The organisation put up posters saying "Say No to NATO" everywhere. I do not know how it can expect us to take development aid organisations seriously. I happen to take them very seriously, but they should have put some distance between themselves and irresponsible activities of that kind. It has not gone unnoticed. All this does is to undermine organisations such as these when they put up silly, misleading, downright dishonest posters of that kind. The mainstream development aid organisations should distance themselves from these people.

If organisations want to be taken seriously we expect them to behave seriously and in an even-handed and fair-minded manner so that we can collectively deliver the results we want. I will not show respect for anybody who does not show respect for me and puts up posters that do not tell the truth. I hope that message will go out to AfrI and anyone else who wants to dabble in politics. We expect development aid organisations to involve themselves with serious issues of development aid and not involve themselves in organising propaganda about joining NATO, which is simply downright dishonest and untrue. It undermines organisations such as these. I have said this before and it should not be lost sight of. If organisations come here they get a good reception; the committee listens to them and tries to work with them. However, we expect them to keep to their agenda, which is important. I hope the Chairman does not mind my raising that issue.

I have no difficulty with the principle of decentralisation, provided it is done on a sustainable basis and is preceded by discussions and a White Paper, with planning and consultation. What happened in this case was that at the end of the budget speech the Minister for Finance announced that people were being decentralised left, right and centre. In some families the husband is going down the country and the wife is going up the country. That is no way to do business. It was done for political reasons, not for any reasons of good management. Furthermore, I have no difficulty with Deputies and Senators standing up for their regions but I am a Dubliner and from here on I am standing up for Dublin.

Deputy Davern

Nobody is saying there is a crisis here.

Deputy G. Mitchell

It was a crack on the back of the hand. The "Dublin mindset" had to be counteracted by the Minister for Finance. This is not acceptable. It would not be allowed to go unchallenged if it was said in Cork or Mayo and it will not go unchallenged as long as I am a Member of the Dáil for Dublin. Many of those who hold office in Dublin are not from Dublin. I have no difficulty with that but they must realise — I say this openly and honestly and I will take whatever criticism results — that their old loyalties to areas they once knew, which have been transformed, thank God, should not take precedence over their loyalty to their constituents in Dublin. It is time to stand up for Dublin. I have no difficulty with Tipperary Deputies standing up for Tipperary or Galway Deputies for Galway, but Dublin Deputies need to stand up more for Dublin. I have no difficulty with decentralisation, provided it is done properly, with consultation and a White Paper that sets out how it will work.

Yesterday when Mr. Barroso came before the European People's Party group to discuss his ratification as President of the Commission next week, I asked him whether he would make the issues of developing countries in Africa, Asia and the Third World generally — HIV and AIDS, development, trade, good governance, debt, hunger and so on — a priority during his presidency. As I have said before, the raison d’être of the European Union is that 60 million people died in the first half of the last century in Europe. The European Union is about ensuring there is peace and stability so this never happens again. However, in Africa and Asia people are being infected and dying in large numbers. This crisis requires from national governments and from the EU the sort of commitment the Union has given to ensuring there is no more war and instability in Europe.

I do not know whether I will be successful in this. I have never been a Minister with responsibility for development aid but I was Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs with responsibility for European Affairs. I have asked to go on the development aid committee of the European Parliament. I do not know whether I will get onto it but if I do I would like to be associated with this committee. I would like to bring the views of this committee and of organisations generally to the European Parliament. This is one of the committees I set out to join and I said when I entered the European Parliament that this would be my priority.

For years we have had the aspiration of donating 0.7% of GDP as development aid, in Government and out of Government, and we never reach it. It is time to legislate for this. We can do it by ensuring it is paid directly out of the Central Fund, like judges' salaries, the Comptroller and Auditor General's salary and the servicing of debt. We will never reach the target of 0.7% until we do this. People always talk about the actual increase in terms of money but they never talk in terms of the 0.7%. I welcome the improvement there has been but we need to take the issue more seriously and introduce appropriate legislation.

The Joint Committee on European Affairs asked Mr. David Begg, Dr. Garret FitzGerald, Mr. David Andrews, Ms Bride Rosney and Mr. Noel Dorr to form a small group and report to the committee — well in advance of Ireland's Presidency — on how the Irish Presidency might move the HIV-AIDS and development issues up the agenda. We felt these were issues the Irish Government could advance with credibility because of our history, not just the Famine of the 1840s, but our work with NGOs and the missionaries.

They reported and did not seek to reinvent the wheel. They did not look at all the issues. They indicated objectives that could be achieved and reported to the committee accordingly. That committee brought the group's recommendations to the Minister and the Minister of State who said they would make this matter a priority, which they did. I want to acknowledge that. That needs to be built on, because if we do not give acknowledgement and support for positive initiatives, people will not be encouraged in their work.

I regret that the European affairs committee did not get the credit for doing that. It should have been given that credit because collectively, across all parties, the committee made that recommendation. It was the only one we made. This is an interesting area of work. I apologise that I was not here for the presentations. I was very late in arriving home last night. I wanted to be here, nonetheless, because it is a very serious issue. I note the presentation that is being made in Strasbourg next week and I will certainly try to get along to that.

Deputy Dempsey

I want to support the idea of a multi-annual budgetary approach to achieving the 0.7% of GNP target in overseas development aid. I note that between 1999 and 2004 our ODA actually doubled. When there are competing interests, whether the hospital bed in Wexford or ODA, it must be kept in mind that the promotion of development is an antidote to war. It is difficult to preach global peace when there are people in abject poverty. That is what we should be preaching as a committee. I am glad there is to be a UN stocktake in September-October 2005. Perhaps that will help to maintain the international focus and the Blair commission on Africa will help that too. I support what is being done.

As regards decentralisation, I am rather amazed. To continue the metaphor of Senator Norris who was talking about pulling up plants, coming as I do from the model county of agriculture, transplantation is actually an integral part of plant life. I would be quite happy to see some of the development that has occurred almost anonymously in Dublin, sent down to Limerick. An autonomy may be achieved there that can never be replicated in Dublin. It is also a gesture towards nurturing the less-developed parts of this country. It is a supreme arrogance to argue that one has to be in Dublin to operate. While I listen to Deputy Gay Mitchell, we obviously do not want to get into a situation of Wexford versus Dublin——

Deputy G. Mitchell

Not in hurling, anyway.

Deputy Dempsey

——but it is time the need for provincial development was recognised. In a different context it is almost synonymous with what Dóchas is about.

Senator Phelan

I agree largely with what previous speakers have said about the 0.7% of GNP target. I welcome the comments by the Dóchas speakers. They are right to make the points now because we have been led to believe over the past number of weeks that the Minister for Finance has come across a fairly substantial amount of money and he will be divvying it out at the end of the year. It is important for Dóchas to hammer away at that point. What Deputy Carey said about pushing an open door as regards this committee is certainly correct. Everybody here is on the same wavelength on that particular issue.

However, the issue that appears to have provoked most controversy today is decentralisation. It was made clear at the start of the letter that Dóchas supported decentralisation at a conceptual level. That is the position I come from as well. I support the idea of decentralisation but it would be wrong if misgivings were not raised about the proposals.

It is also outlined in the letter that opportunities will arise from decentralisation and that is true. However, Dóchas would be in neglect of its role and duty to the people who work in its organisations if it did not express the concerns which many people have. Deputy Carey mentioned the radical approach of DCI and the way it challenges the system. A great many people have concerns about the manner in which the whole decentralisation programme was announced in the last budget. The fact that Dóchas has put it down on paper is something it could be complimented on, rather than criticised about.

I do not come from Dublin and I therefore could not be accused of having a Dublin mindset. I do not know whether I have a Kilkenny mindset but the concerns expressed here would be shared by many people.

A number of comments were made by Government members of the committee. Some mentioned carpets and chandeliers, which I thought was a very disparaging remark. I do not believe that people become involved in the work in this area for the trappings. I do not believe there are many trappings that go with it. That remark was unfortunate and should not have been made. I have no doubt that whether DCI ends up in Limerick or wherever it will continue its good work. I wish it the very best. There certainly appears to be a question mark as to whether the decentralisation programme will go ahead as planned. I would applaud the radical approach in putting these concerns down on paper. Everybody else is talking about it, but no one is writing it down.

Deputy Gregory

As regards the comment by Deputy Gay Mitchell, if he had been further afield than Brussels last night, I would have thought he was suffering from jetlag in his earlier remarks. I thought members of the committee all believed in freedom of expression. AfrI was perfectly entitled to——

Deputy G. Mitchell

Who paid for those lies?

Deputy Gregory

I did not interrupt the Deputy.

Deputy G. Mitchell

What the Deputy is saying is nonsense. To put up a notice that says, "Vote no to NATO" was absolutely ridiculous.

Chairman

Deputy Gay Mitchell has made his point clearly. Perhaps he would let Deputy Gregory continue.

Deputy Gregory

I want to restate that AfrI was perfectly entitled to interpret the Nice treaty in whatever way it saw its implications. I do not believe any member of the committee should expect organisations to toe his or her political line. Deputy Gay Mitchell had a neck to make statements to the effect that "these things will not be forgotten". I find that unique in contributions to this or any other committee and I object to it. I feel strongly that everyone is entitled to freedom of expression, no matter what organisation he or she is in, and is entitled to interpret the implications of the Nice treaty or anything else as he or she sees it.

Deputy G. Mitchell

They certainly are not entitled to——

Deputy Gregory

If the Deputy was running the country——

Deputy G. Mitchell

We did not join NATO. It is an absolute lie that we joined NATO.

Deputy Gregory

If the Deputy had his way we would have been in NATO long ago.

Deputy G. Mitchell

Why did AfrI not use that money for the people who were hungry and starving and promote good causes, instead of running lies about saying "No" to NATO?

Chairman

Deputy Gay Mitchell is already on record as regards that point. I have to admit there is some provocation in it. The comment about the hard neck was not necessary.

Deputy G. Mitchell

The Chairman is trying to ingratiate himself again.

Deputy Gregory

When people make statements——

Deputy G. Mitchell

I made a truthful statement and we did say we are not in NATO——

Deputy Gregory

——with a good deal of innuendo——

Deputy G. Mitchell

Is it possible the Deputy does not recognise the truth? Is it difficult——

Chairman

The committee will hear Deputy Gregory.

Deputy Gregory

I will make my own contribution, with that sort of interference. Having listened to Deputy Gay Mitchell for quite some time, if left to him it would not be long before we are in NATO.

Deputy G. Mitchell

I set it out in the document entitled Beyond Neutrality. The Deputy cannot even tell that lie. I have never advocated that Ireland should join NATO but I have an open mind on the matter, unlike Deputy Gregory who has a closed mind on all issues except those which get him votes.

Senator Mooney

I would like to hear what Deputy Gregory has to say.

Deputy Gregory

I wholly endorse the view that the committee should recommend the achievement of the original target and I am glad to see other members in agreement on this matter. I was somewhat taken aback by Deputy Carey's assertion that the argument might be put forward that it is a choice between development aid and facilities such as hospital beds and school classrooms and so on. Deputy Carey is a member of a Government party which was able to find €60 million to waste on electronic voting machines.

Deputy Davern

That figure has increased.

Deputy Gregory

I am sure it has. My experience during the local election campaign was that members of the public are very unhappy that this sort of squandering of public funds was permitted while other commitments, such as the one we are discussing today, were not fulfilled, not to mention the situation in hospitals and schools. It is not a case of one or the other but rather that the Government must re-organise its priorities——

Deputy Carey

It is also the case that all Deputies must pay attention to all debates, including the Estimates debate during which this matter was discussed in significant detail two weeks ago.

Deputy G. Mitchell

Senator Mooney wants to hear what Deputy Gregory has to say. He wants to hear more baloney.

Chairman

Deputy Gregory should conclude shortly.

Deputy Gregory

The Chairman will be glad to hear that I am not going to get involved in the decentralisation debate other than to say that I do not accept that any organisation cannot be as efficient in Limerick as it is in Dublin. That may sound strange coming from a representative of the Dublin Central constituency but it is how I feel.

Deputy Davern

I acknowledge that the Government should have reached the target of 0.7% for ODA. I understand that the Spanish Government has agreed to attain that figure by 2012. It is peculiar that those countries which were previously colonised are not generally to the fore in meeting their commitments regarding ODA, although the value of such aid can be seen in the cities and streets of these countries every day. Like Deputy Gregory, I was disappointed by Deputy Mitchell's implied threat that these things will not be forgotten. There is some perception that certain Members of Dáil Éireann would like Ireland to join NATO and it is a proposition that has been mentioned by one political party for a long time. Militarisation has been the cause of many of the problems in places such as Africa and South America so people are justified in their opposition to militarisation.

One of my concerns is that questions have been raised in recent years about the value for money that is attained in terms of ODA. One organisation has claimed that the money allocated to Uganda was not well spent but I am not talking about that. I refer to a wider perception by the international media. For example, there were reports that one country used some of its aid allocation for the purchase of a €50 million Government jet while its population suffers from poverty and starvation. There is a perception that it may be pointless to donate money when it is being misspent and not reaching the people who really need it. More people are required on the ground to work with the people in these countries and ensure and reassure us that the money is being spent for the purpose intended. It is not that the money is not deserved but there is a perception that it is not trickling down to the level at which it is needed but is instead being filtered at various higher levels. The international organisations could be extremely useful in training people in this regard while also ensuring that that training includes an accounting element which can demonstrate transparently how the Irish taxpayers' contributions are being spent.

Decentralisation would be enormously beneficial for DCI as it would be perceived as independent of the Dublin organisations and command the support of a vast, more rural area. One can attain more political influence in this way than in being lost in the hubbub of an array of different organisations in Dublin.

Senator Mooney

I emphasise that I subscribe fully to the view that the organisations represented here today are entitled to express their opinions, lest there is any confusion on that point. That is not the point I was making. Like all members of this committee, I have tremendous admiration and empathy with everything that Dóchas and its constituent groupings are doing. The raison d’être of the committee is to continually highlight that work. I felt, however, that the issue of decentralisation may not be a priority in terms of the overall context of the work done by Dóchas but it has every right to express its views on that matter.

Mr. Roche

I thank members for their contributions, particularly those in support of ODA. It is heartening to hear that Deputies and Senators support the target of 0.7% and we shall take on board Deputy Mitchell's very useful suggestion about the desirability of having that figure incorporated into legislation.

Most of the discussion has focused on the issue of decentralisation so I shall deal with that first. Dóchas is not about the broader programme of decentralisation and we all have sympathy with the concept and principle of decentralisation. Indeed, I have some personal sympathy for that approach. However, concerns were raised with Dóchas member organisations when the decentralisation plan for DCI was announced about how the plan might affect the working of that organisation, which is responsible for spending a lot of money on behalf of Irish taxpayers and which has close relations with Dóchas members. Dóchas felt it necessary to explore those concerns and research by an independent consultant was commissioned to ascertain how the decentralisation move might affect DCI's operations. Dóchas has written to the Minister for Foreign Affairs on the basis of the findings in that research and we have set our concerns before the committee today for the consideration of its members.

As to how often Dóchas visits the DCI office, the answer is quite often. Various colleagues and I deal with the different sections of DCI. It is useful for us on a personal level to be able to go to DCI and speak in person with the people in charge of the various areas. For example, a delegation from Dóchas recently met the Minister for Foreign Affairs and a number of his departmental staff to discuss the issue of Darfur prior to a high-level aid meeting in Geneva. In the future, such meetings would necessitate either a journey by Dóchas delegates to Dublin or by some departmental staff members to Limerick. That is one practical example of how the decentralisation plan would physically affect the work of DCI in conjunction with the NGO community.

A question was also raised regarding specialism. Over the past number of years, DCI has begun to recruit specialist staff from outside the ranks of the Department of Foreign Affairs because the expertise has not been available within the Department. One of the concerns I raised in my presentation was the need to retain these specialist staff members and to retain the ability to recruit more specialist staff as required. The work of departmental staff involves a significant amount of multi-tasking but the existing skills base was considered insufficient to deal with the tasks which must be undertaken by DCI. Dóchas hopes to see further external recruitment of specialist expertise to assist DCI in its work.

I shall deal now with the broader issue of DCI and the position of its constituent bodies. Some committee members raised the issue of these bodies potentially having greater independence outside of Dublin. However the Ireland Aid Review, chaired by former Minister of State, Deputy Liz O'Donnell, examined the workings of Development Cooperation Ireland and concluded the best option was to retain it within the Department of Foreign Affairs although that was not in the context of relocation. Senator O'Rourke mentioned the possibility of a separate, stand alone section of a Department. I am sympathetic towards views on the independence of DCI but the current position is that it is part of the Department of Foreign Affairs. It is neither an agency nor is it a separate Department. Relocation is happening in that context. Some of our concerns arise from the potential effects of DCI being a part of the Department but located elsewhere. These are the main issues. My colleague, Caoimhe de Barra, will speak further on them.

Ms de Barra

Mr. Roche gave a good summary of our concerns. The area of development is complex. It is not merely concerned with the delivery of aid as commonly presented by the media. In responding to emergency situations our priority is to efficiently address the needs of the poorest and most vulnerable and translate emergency action into long-term development. However, development is essentially about policy. Progress in development and eradicating poverty is predicated on the foreign policy of northern states as well as trade and finance policies and, most important, domestic government policy. Core development work is based on delivery of effective aid, such as the building of feeder roads, the digging of wells and livelihood security projects. These will not guarantee long-term development unless there is integration with the policy dimensions.

Ireland's foreign policy feeds into the European Union's foreign policy. In these terms, policy coherence within the Department of Foreign Affairs is fundamental to the role of DCI, its mandate and the work it can achieve. That is the first step to broader Government policy coherence when dealing with the impact of trade policy on the development prospects of poor countries and the impact of Department of Finance policies, especially in respect of Bretton Woods institutions and their impact on development policy in these countries.

One of the key risks is increased fracturing of policy between DCI and the Department. In our everyday work as agencies we deal with political and development issues. In Zimbabwe and Sudan we are dealing with governance issues. We are aware these will never be addressed by the development directorate alone. This is why we feel a separation of the development directorate from the Department could damage the completion of the directorate's mandate.

Chairman

I thank the delegation. Does Mr. Roche wish to respond to the first question about the target of 0.7%?

Mr. Roche

We were happy to hear members' comments. I urge the committee to bring forward a motion seeking an multi-annual agreement between the Minister for Foreign Affairs and the Minister for Finance. Such an agreement would set the expenditure increases necessary to reach the target of 0.7% by 2007.

Senator Mooney

We are grateful to the delegation for clarifying the issue. We do not underestimate the seriousness of the issues raised. We would be concerned about any diminution in DCI's influence. Ms de Barra made a strong point about the political and developmental elements within Iveagh House. There are questions of governance as well as development aid. I am not pre-empting the feelings of others on this matter. However, has the delegation received a reply to issues raised in the letter to the Minister for Foreign Affairs?

Mr. Roche

We have not received a reply as yet.

Senator Mooney

The committee should support clarification of the issues raised with regard to protecting DCI's good work and the relationship between NGOs and the Department of Foreign Affairs. We support the suggestion that a motion be issued from this committee encouraging the Government to achieve the target of 0.7% by 2007.

Chairman

We will ask the Minister for his views on the issues raised with him and seek clarification on his position.

This has been an interesting, relevant and timely discussion. I thank the members of the delegation for appearing before the committee and for their well prepared presentation. The overriding issue is the target of 0.7%. The delegation's paper is simple and clear and makes its case well. Views on decentralisation have been genuinely expressed. The study on how it may affect the operation of DCI is valuable. The delegation heard the views of members of the committee on this matter and we will ask the Minister for his views.

The committee supports significant progress in the forthcoming Estimates and budget. Although Ireland has fallen somewhat behind in development aid, it compares well internationally. However we have set an important target. While there may be economic difficulties we must be clear in our objectives. Are we going to help people in the Third World or not? If we are, the target of 0.7% is not a lot to expect of a well developed country . It may mean a lot of money to us on an annual budget. An increase in the GNP means that figure also increases, which makes it more difficult to achieve the target on a year by year basis. There may be setbacks, such as in the past year and a half, and there may be need for modification. However, we should keep the target in sight. It was a significant initiative and one which is important to continue to strive for. The possibility of a three year multi-annual agreement is always an issue. There was a three year multi-annual agreement for 2000-2002. It fell behind somewhat but it was implemented. That provides reassurance. This is what we need in order to achieve the target of 0.7%. We must try for a further three-year programme, because 2007 is not far away.

I accept the points which have been made. The issue of money not being used in the best possible way is being dealt with. Both Ministers have given reassurances that much work has been done to ensure it is dealt with, particularly by ensuring money is directed to projects on the ground. At the same time we must work on governance. If we do not work at improving governance and public administration, the rest will fall apart. We have seen from our visits and studies that meeting people and showing them how parliamentary democracy can be built is very important to development.

From that point of view, the committee supports the view taken. We have made the point repeatedly to the Minister, including in the Estimates, that we want to see a significant improvement in moving towards a contribution of 0.7%. We will pursue the three-year programme. I am sure everyone will agree that the work the organisation is doing is very important nationally. We have a great reputation in that area as a result of the work done by missionaries, NGOs and successive Governments in the past.

I accept that many countries need to increase their percentage contribution per head of population. We have been doing that and must continue to do so. We will convey the representatives' views and the views of the committee to the Minister and the Taoiseach, because the Taoiseach sets the target. It has been complied with to date and I hope it continues.

I thank the representatives for participating with us here today. The annual Estimates process is still under way and the position for 2005 will be decided later in the year. It is timely, therefore, for the committee to have an opportunity to discuss the issues involved and we will bring the views expressed to the attention of the Ministers concerned and the Taoiseach. I thank the delegation again.

The next item relates to EU scrutiny. I now come to correspondence from the sub-committee on European scrutiny. The sub-committee has examined a number of proposals falling within the remit of the Department of Foreign Affairs which we can agree as we move along. These include document COM (2004) 313 — a proposal regarding access to Community external assistance and COM (2004) 386 — a request by Burkina Faso to accede to the protocol on ACP sugar. There are recommendations from the sub-committee and it agreed that no further scrutiny is required.

The next document is COM (2004) 354, 355, 357, 358 and 370 — proposals concerning the stabilisation association agreements between the EU and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Croatia and Armenia to take account of the accession of the new member states of the European Union. These are standard processes. Document COM (2004) 381 is a proposal outlining the general approach for the re-allocation of resources establishing an instrument for structural policies for pre-accession. Document COM (2004) 404 is a proposal on the implementation of Article 75 of the Euro-Mediterranean agreement establishing an association between the EU and Egypt. The sub-committee had recommended that no further scrutiny of these proposals is necessary. Is that agreed? Agreed.

The sub-committee has also asked us to take note of several other proposals adopted before scrutiny and two CFSP measures. Document COM (2004) 241 is a proposal regarding a decision on the use of the reserve of the long-term development envelope, as well as resources from the investment facility of the ninth European development fund for the establishment of ACPEU water facility.

Document 286/2004 is a proposal for a Council decision on the signing of the Cooperation agreement on a civil global navigation satellite system, the GNSS, between the EU and Israel. Members received a copy of the proposal. We are familiar with these global systems, the GPS system. Galileo is a commercial civil system which is being extended to Israel.

Document COM (2004) 378 is a proposal for a Council decision fixing the financial contributions to be paid by member states contributing to the European development fund second instalment 2004. Document COM (2004) 487 is the Council's Common Position concerning further restrictive measures in regard to Liberia. COM (2004) 500 is the Council's Common Position on the application of specific measures to combat terrorism. This Common Position adds a number of entities that have been linked to terrorist attacks in Italy, such as the Artisan's Co-operative Fire and the Red Brigades for the Construction of the Fighting Communist Party. These are noted.

The joint committee went into private session at 12.36 p.m. and adjourned at 12.40 p.m. sine die.