JOINT COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS debate -
Tuesday, 18 Jan 2005

Tsunami Relief Effort: Presentations.

Chairman

The next item is a discussion with representatives of Trócaire, Concern, GOAL and the Irish Red Cross regarding aid for the victims of the tsunami. The representatives are Mr. Tom Arnold and Mr. Howard Dalzell of Concern; Mr. Justin Kilcullen and Ms Patricia Hallahan of Trócaire; Mr. John O'Shea of GOAL; and Mr. David Andrews, Ms Carmel Dunne and Ms Aoife MacEoin of the Irish Red Cross.

We all recognise the tremendous work done by the NGOs in the short period since Christmas. The world was shocked last month by the devastation caused by the tsunami in south-east Asia. The scale of the disaster is hard to comprehend. It is estimated that over 175,000 people lost their lives. While nations have responded in an extraordinarily generous way, there is a long road ahead. We must remain committed to the recovery and reconstruction of the areas affected.

Various questions arise on which we would like to hear the views of the NGOs which have had the opportunity to visit the scene to see what is needed and what is being done. Do the Irish agencies have the capacity to absorb and effectively deploy the massive inflow of funds now being directed towards them? What resources did they have available on the ground before the tsunami struck? How did they manage to ramp up their efforts in the region so quickly? Euro for euro, what is the best way an Irish person who wishes to help the victims of this disaster can spend his or her money? What needs to be done to bring aid to those affected by the disaster and ensure more lives are not lost through disease and neglect? Can the representatives outline what is required in the medium and long term to rebuild the communities and economies affected by the disaster? That is an important issue because it will take more than one year to resolve the problems and undertake the reconstruction required in the region. There have been reports that aid is not getting through in all cases to those who need it and that it is not being used efficiently by the authorities in some countries.

When such an unprecedented and spectacular disaster occurs, there is a danger that it will take up all of the resources available at the expense of other less immediate crises or those that occur away from the attention of the world's media. Darfur has been mentioned as have the ongoing efforts to feed those affected by war in Iraq and Afghanistan which have attracted most attention from the world's media in the past year or so. However, there are also crises in the Great Lakes region of Africa and food insecurity in Haiti, the Horn of Africa and elsewhere in sub-Saharan Africa. We visited a number of these areas and are aware of the activities of the NGOs. These are issues about which we are concerned.

I invite the members of the NGOs to make their contributions giving us an insight into what they have been doing and what needs to be done. We will begin with Mr. Tom Arnold, chief executive officer of Concern. If Mr. Dalzell wants to make a contribution, he may do so.

Mr. Tom Arnold

I am sure I speak on everyone's behalf when I express our gratitude to the committee for arranging this meeting. As members are aware, we came back on Thursday evening from the trip with the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Dermot Ahern, which we all found worthwhile. It was a worthwhile initiative on the part of the Minister.

We have all been struck by the remarkable response of the people to the disaster. Large quantities of resources have flowed in. The Chairman asked about the capacity to deploy them. As he will be aware, last Friday I suggested, on behalf of Concern, that we had enough resources for the moment to deal with the short to medium term programmes we had in place. There is no question that the longer term programmes will need more resources but we felt it was possible to get some of the resources required from the major donors. We felt we should be as ever as transparent and honest with the public as possible and said the public contribution was adequate for our needs for the moment.

I also made the point on Friday, on which the Chairman touched in his introduction, that notwithstanding how awful this tragedy had been, there were many other places in the world suffering from both short and long-term problems. The statistic I have used a number of times is that the disaster has accounted for the loss of 170,000 lives but the same number die in Africa every two weeks from largely preventable problems such as hunger and disease. We have to keep our attention focussed on that wider picture. I was glad to see a growing recognition and acceptance of this over the weekend.

We have to look at the question of immediate priorities country by country. In India, a country we did not visit, our sense is the situation is under control to a considerable degree. A total of 10,000 people lost their lives in the state of Tamil Nadu and another 5,000 remain missing. Our response was almost instantaneous in that we had our Indian programme team in the state the day after the disaster occurred. There has been a rapid distribution of aid in association with local partners in the intervening period and we are now at the point of planning for rehabilitation.

This touches upon an important issue of which we have to take account when we examine the different countries, namely, the degree to which they are equipped from a governmental, administrative and civil society point of view to respond to the problems. India stated early on that it did not need external assistance to solve the problem. The resources that have been brought to bear have been helpful and effective but they are being applied within the framework of a coherent Indian Government response.

When we got to Indonesia, as we saw last Tuesday, everybody was struck, both by the television images but even more so in reality, by the sheer scale of the devastation. Banda Aceh is still at a very early stage of recovery. The authorities are still in the business of finding bodies and burying the dead. When we were there, they were still looking for 15,000 to 20,000 people. Clearing the debris is the priority. When we get beyond this, we will have to start looking at the short and medium-term priorities. We quickly sent some very experienced people, including Mr. Paddy Maguinness, deputy chief executive of Concern, who was followed by Ms Áine Fay. Mr. Paul Crowe, an experienced engineer, will go to the area later this week to head up the team there. The priorities are the provision of water, sanitation and housing. There has been complete devastation of the housing stock and we are trying to get the economy going again. This is an area where there was a poor but viable economy.

Indonesia presents a more complex problem than any of the other countries about which we are talking because of the political dimension in terms of the security problems in Banda Aceh. It is an area that will require a degree of political attention. When the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Dermot Ahern, was there, he stressed in his discussions with the Indonesian Minister in charge of the operation the necessity for the Indonesian Government to allow access to external bodies, NGOs and international organisations to continue the work of reconstruction and rehabilitation. This is critical and something that needs to be kept in clear focus.

We also saw in Indonesia the considerable military and logistical might that had been brought to bear, particularly by the Americans and Australians. This was an important factor in dealing with the immediate problem. There is an issue of co-ordination with the United Nations. In the immediate aftermath of the tragedy it was difficult to establish effective co-ordination. The co-ordination of the work involved is beginning to take place. It still may not be perfect but it is progressing. We need to keep urging that there be effective co-ordination. We need to be constructive and make sure that we co-ordinate our own activities and encourage the United Nations and others to ensure the most effective co-ordination possible.

Shortly after the earthquake struck we sent a very experienced early assessment team to Sri Lanka in the shape of Mr. Howard Dalzell and Ms Ann O'Mahony. Mr. Dalzell is in a much better position to talk more about the matter. I would like to cede time to him to comment on it. We now have Fr. Jack Finucane in place as country director. He will bring a huge level of experience to the position.

With regard to impressions gained on the trip to Sri Lanka last week, there was a real sense that the government was in effective control of the response. The Sri Lankan economy is such that it will be able to recover. I expect the country will be able to get on its feet again with external support which is an important factor. It is a question of planning and co-ordinating the work properly and acknowledging that Sri Lanka has effective local structures in place within which the external NGO effort can fit.

I wish to comment on the Government's response. The initial contribution was made shortly after the disaster happened. Last week the Minister for Foreign Affairs announced in Sri Lanka the additional allocation of €10 million. It remains to be seen whether this is adequate but for the moment it seems it is. The technical group which is undertaking a more detailed assessment will bring back its report and decisions will then have to be made as to the adequacy of the resources made available. The overall sense is that a lot of resources have been devoted to this disaster, terrible as it is. However, in the longer term we will have to make sure there is a fair balance between the needs of the victims of this disaster and the many needs of people suffering elsewhere.

Mr. Howard Dalzell

The disaster in Sri Lanka was unthinkable. I travelled for hundreds of kilometres along the coastline and the destruction and underlying human trauma to which it gave rise was unbelievable. On the other hand, if one travels a few miles inland, one realises that one is in a country bang in the middle of the United Nations' list of 180 countries. This is a country that is very capable in many ways. The response of local people only a few kilomestres away from the tsunami saved their fellow citizens an enormous amount of hardship. They reacted quickly, spontaneously and generously by delivering food, clothing and water. This was very encouraging.

The response of the Sri Lankan Government struck me. While it is possible to whinge about governments not doing enough — no government ever does enough for its people, of which I am sure members are aware — from my experience in countries such as Bangladesh, Turkey, India, Somalia and others, the Sri Lankan Government's response was well above average. It quickly organised the clearing of roads and the provision of relief. It is developing all sorts of grant schemes to provide emergency relief. At its co-ordination meetings I am sure information was provided untutored, which is rare. The government uses modern technology, websites, e-communication facilities and so on. It deserves a good deal of credit. Remarkably within a few days it had adopted a position on how it would deal with orphan children. Its preference was for legal adoption. It wants to avoid establishing big institutions. It was quick off the mark on the issue. The Sri Lankan psychiatrists' association has put together a list of do's and don'ts on counselling which has been widely dispersed because there are tens of thousands who are traumatised but there is a plan for dealing with the issue. All of this is very encouraging.

Concern was able to respond quickly in Sri Lanka because we were part of an alliance with several European partner agencies, one of which had been working for many years in Sri Lanka, hand in hand with an indigenous agency, Sewalanka. "Sewa" is a Gandhian and Hindu word meaning service. Sewalanka has been providing a service for the poor in Sri Lanka for the past ten years. Interestingly, it has been working on both sides of the peace line with the Tamils in the north and Sinhalese in the south. It has offices in the north and is able to ensure assistance is provided. It is working in the north with our German partner. We are working with it in three districts in the south where it has a staff, available to us, of more than 200 experienced development workers whose ongoing work has been cast aside by the enormity of the disaster. These experienced people who are in contact with the fishing and women's co-ops are liaising with regard to the co-ordination taking place at district level through government agents. We can avail of this enormous resource.

Before I tell members what Concern is doing in the area, I would like to mention the threat posed by disease. I have no doubt that in Indonesia there is great potential for the outbreak of disease. However, in Sri Lanka most of the displaced people gathered in small concentrations in school buildings and Buddhist temples which had latrine facilities. The temples quickly built additional facilities. As a narrow coastal strip was affected, most people were close to sources of bottled water which was delivered quickly. There were exceptions where some had to wait for several days before getting relief. However, due to the ready availability of clean water, the small concentrations of people and the cultural standards regarding the use of latrines, I am hopeful there will not be a serious disease problem in Sri Lanka. The Sri Lankan Government health service is working hard, through education, backup and the availability of ORS and so forth, to ensure it does not happen.

Concern's programme envisages the rebuilding of 4,000 houses, each of which will have a latrine. That work is under way. It also envisages the cleaning of 1,500 wells. We believe it will be necessary to develop another 150 new wells where new housing colonies are established. We will work on the rehabilitation of some school buildings and possibly some health posts. There will be a great deal of work done in rebuilding the buildings used by fishing co-operatives because fishing is the mainstay of the economy along the coast. We will also help to re-establish some ice plants to help fishermen in their marketing processes.

With regard to regenerating incomes, we are anxious to ensure much of the money goes to safeguarding the position of women. Where we help a family to re-establish a house, we wish to ensure the house is in the joint names of the husband and wife in order that the wife's vulnerability is reduced as a result of the rebuilding. We will also ensure much of our rehabilitation money goes to helping women re-establish the important income generating activities in which they were engaged before the tsunami. Inevitably, much of the rehabilitation money will be used in providing groups of fishermen and co-ops with small boats and nets in order that they can re-establish their income as quickly as possible.

There is a huge problem. It is difficult to overestimate the enormous personal trauma and sadness that have come to so many families from which they will never fully recover. However, there is a positive note with regard to the Government. There are huge needs but Concern has the financial resources. Through our partners, we believe we have the human resources to deliver a good quality response to this problem.

Mr. Justin Kilcullen

We are aware from the television coverage of the nature of the physical disaster. The visit simply confirmed what we knew beforehand. It is awful to see the level of devastation.

I had just a couple of opportunities to talk to victims. The problem with a whirlwind tour through south-east Asia was that there was little time to stop to talk to people. However, at one or two junctures one got the real sense of loss for people who had died and families which had been destroyed. That human side of the problem, the level of trauma experienced by the population in the affected areas, is intangible to the outsiders who arrive to help. What will be central to all the relief and development efforts in years to come will be the ability of people to overcome this trauma and face the real difficulties of rebuilding their livelihoods, communities and countries. It is worthwhile mentioning this aspect. Sometimes we can deal with these issues in a technical way and not remember the human story.

Trócaire's response is co-ordinated with 15 other members of Caritas Internationalis, a network of Catholic relief and development agencies across the world which has over 156 member agencies. People in the wealthier countries are the donor community while those in the southern countries are, in many ways, the beneficiaries of our funds. We were well positioned because Caritas was present in Sri Lanka and India and, in a less strong way, Indonesia. From the start, therefore, Caritas responded to the immediate needs of the victims. As Howard remarked, it was the people of the countries affected who were the first line of relief and who brought the food, clothing, water and so forth to the affected areas. Trócaire was able to allocate €1 million to this effort. It was shipped out quickly and has helped to keep the relief effort going. This effort will continue for a period of up to six months until people can be settled into an intermediate arrangement regarding shelter and so forth.

We are working with our local partners and have supported their efforts by joining international support teams from the Caritas network. Four of our staff have become part of these multinational and multidisciplinary teams. They have put together a series of programmes that will run in three phases: up to six months, six to 18 months and up to five years beyond that. These programmes have been put in place in Sri Lanka, Indonesia and India. The total number of beneficiaries will be 1.6 million and the total budget to date is €201 million. Trócaire has €20 million, received from the general public, to put into that pot. While €201 million might seem to be a great deal of money for NGOs, when one takes account of all the efforts throughout the Caritas network in Europe, we have more funds than that available to implement the programmes. The advantage of working in such a co-ordinated way is we can draw on the expertise of all the agencies involved. In this way we can put together teams that are in position to support the efforts to implement the series of programmes which are similar to those mentioned by other speakers. They deal with houses, infrastructure, trauma counselling, income generation and so forth. Essentially, they are about helping people to rebuild their lives.

The co-ordination also avoids the plethora of NGOs which often turn up at disasters such as this, where people are elbowing each other out of the way in trying to get a slice of the action. We have learned from our experience of disasters during the past 15 years that this is the best way to operate with international groups. It helps to create the capacity to implement the relief measures. There is capacity to implement programmes when one works at a consortium level and the staff are available to see the programmes through.

There are a number of issues related to the disaster which we wish to bring to the committee's attention. The first is Indonesia. Everybody is aware that there has been a complicated political problem in Aceh for a number of years. The relationship between the government of Indonesia, the people of Aceh and political movements there is far from easy. I do not wish to support one side or the other in such political arguments but it is a serious factor that must be considered. Already the Indonesian Government is trying to put limits on the presence of foreign troops for delivering aid and is asking NGOs to register. We are a little worried. While there is nothing wrong with registering and so forth, we worry that constraints will be put on the movement and activities of international bodies, governmental and non-governmental. Given that this area was the most severely affected by the tsunami, it is important that relations with the Indonesian Government are clear and open, that the government respects the goodwill of the international community and the non-governmental organisations and facilitates aid supplies being brought to those who need them most. It is still the case in Aceh that the most remote communities are not getting the assistance they need. It has been difficult for those who are there to operate efficiently. We would like the Government to monitor this matter closely to ensure all those who are victims of the disaster, regardless of any political considerations which might arise, receive the aid they require.

The second matter to which we wish to draw attention is the Government's response which has been generous. However, in terms of the good humanitarian donorship principles agreed in Stockholm in 2003, commitments were entered into by donor governments that funding of new crises measures would not adversely affect the meeting of needs in ongoing crises and that they would strive to ensure predictability and flexibility in the funding of UN agencies and other programmes in responding to humanitarian issues. We are somewhat concerned by the fact that the humanitarian assistance allocation in the overall aid budget, which stands at €27 million, has fallen by €10 million as a result of the second allocation by the Government. This means that 37% of the budget has now been allocated and we are only two weeks into the new year. It would be appropriate for the Government to replenish the humanitarian assistance budget line before the passing of the Finance Bill in order that the money can, in fact, be raised and returned to where it belongs. Everyone is aware of the number of ongoing crises, particularly in Africa, and we feel we may be left short in responding to these unless action is taken.

As regards debt, we welcome the fact that the Paris Club has offered a moratorium on debt repayments by Indonesia, Sri Lanka and the Seychelles. However, the position is unclear as to whether interest will accumulate on this debt during the period of the moratorium. Perhaps the Department of Foreign Affairs will monitor this issue to ensure an additional burden is not placed on these countries by virtue of interest being allowed to accumulate.

Despite the fact that this was a natural disaster, there are underlying issues of trade, debt and aid which must be addressed. We cannot just respond in a humanitarian way. The issue of trade in Sri Lanka is a case in point. The clothing sector accounts for half of Sri Lanka's total export income. However, in terms of exports to the European Union and the United States, Sri Lanka paid $77 million in duties to the European Union in 2003 on such exports. The position with Indonesia which paid $180 million was similar. As regards the more favourably treated countries, it is interesting to note that the six Scandinavian countries paid a total of $227 million in duties to the United States in respect of their exports to that jurisdiction. Sri Lanka paid almost the same amount. The Scandinavian countries have a deal which is worth 12 times more to them than to the poorest countries. The figures to which I refer are contained in the document I have circulated.

There is a flow of almost $1 billion into the economies of the richer countries from duties paid by the countries affected by the tsunami. Until some measure of fairness returns to trading and debt relationships and aid budgets return to promised levels, the countries affected which are among the poorest will remain vulnerable. The assistance being provided is being undermined by the economic structures in place to benefit our countries in respect of our relationships with poorer countries. These matters must be given urgent attention. Serious consideration must be given to the trading relationship between the European Union and the countries affected by the tsunami. The latter must be seen to benefit from fairer trade relations that could be negotiated in the coming year under the Doha Round.

Chairman

I thank Mr. Kilcullen. Next we will have Mr. John O'Shea, chief executive of GOAL.

Mr. John O’Shea

Chief bottle-washer. I thank the Chairman for affording me the opportunity to speak to the committee. I will try not to repeat what has been said. Mr. Kilcullen made some fine remarks but I am sure the committee does not want to hear them again.

I am deeply concerned about the aid effort. Aid agencies are not the answer to this problem and never will be. The scale of the disaster is way too big for us to cope with. We will probably do a good job and will, I hope, be in a position to eventually say so. I am more concerned about the fact that the international community has yet again reneged on its obligations. It is imperative that it should be centrally involved in the entire aid effort but that is not the case. There is no sign of any one person or government from the West taking control. NATO, the European Union and the United Nations are not in the van of any move to ensure every human being who suffered because of the tsunami have their livelihoods restored and lives repaired. If this does not happen, the aid effort will be a failure. We must treat every child, woman and man in exactly the same way in this situation. The rank and file citizens of western countries have shown that they care. However, we are leaving matters to governments which, by and large, I would not trust to decide who will benefit and who will not.

Before heaping criticism on Third World governments, I would consider the position in western countries. If we faced a situation where the two items we had to provide were houses and livelihoods, one can imagine the scramble that would ensue. People who are allegedly poor but who are, in fact, middle class would suddenly appear on the list for houses. The same position would apply in respect of livelihoods. This is an extraordinarily difficult task with which those involved in the aid effort must deal. The least that should happen is that a watchdog from the West should be put in place. We must not forget that the West has contributed a staggering number of millions in aid but there is no indication that the international community, as a whole, will play a pivotal role. That is a matter of deep concern. I have spent 27 years working in the Third World and I am aware that corruption and bureaucracy suddenly appear when vast sums of money come into play. Members can be certain that this will be the case in all of the countries affected by the disaster.

Aid agencies cannot monitor what is happening and demand X, Y or Z from a particular government. There are serious signs that the Indonesian Government wants all of the aid agencies to leave its jurisdiction. It is only a matter of time. We were warned recently that members of the Indonesian army, dressed as rebels, were going to attack aid convoys and advised to get our people out. The American army is doing a superb job in the area. One would think its soldiers who have rolled up their sleeves and gone to work were from Letterfrack or Caherciveen. As they throw supplies, etc., out of their helicopters, they are being watched by AK-47 wielding members of the Indonesian army who do not give a fiddler's shit about their own people. These individuals are going to see millions of dollars floating around and they will not worry about a 26 year old GOAL doctor or nurse saying the money should be spent in a particular way. We will be pushed out of the way. If the international community does not put in place a strong physical presence, we all may return here one year from now to discuss the money, etc., that has been wasted. The Irish people will not tolerate this and will expect the Government to ensure we are, at the very least, centrally involved.

As I have stated on a couple of occasions since I returned, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Dermot Ahern, played an extremely effective role when he visited the disaster area. He impressed me in terms of the way he spoke to officials. He looked them in the eye and called a spade a spade. That was refreshing. I would love him to be allowed to address the Security Council and demand that the United Nations should take that role because people power is at play. The people of the West, especially in our own country, showed that they cared. The Government must reflect this concern, not only by writing a cheque. I do not criticise or praise the Government for doing so because it can do much more. It should be the voice of the tsunami. That is Ireland's role because never before have the Irish people played such an important part. It should be our man or woman, in this case, Deputy Dermot Ahern. He should be the voice of the tsunami. With the deepest respect to the ongoing problem north of Dundalk, there is nothing happening around the globe as important as the delivery of aid.

The real challenge begins now. It is relatively easy for aid agencies and others to get aid to people in desperate need after a tragedy such as this but it is a much more difficult and different challenge to rehouse them because money comes into play, and to restore livelihoods because economies come into play. The wealthy and the greedy will want their share of the action. Once the televisions cameras leave, much of the interest, pledges and involvement will disappear. To keep people's noses to the grindstone there must be somebody somewhere who will say, "Hey lads, do you remember this?" That is the role Ireland must play.

The Chairman asked about capacity. I cannot answer that question because I do not know whether we will be allowed to stay anywhere for the long haul. It was easy for GOAL to respond to the Indian element because we had worked in Calcutta for 27 years. We managed to sneak in to the Andaman Islands — I hope my friend, the Indian ambassador, will not get on the telephone — under the cover of darkness because I kept the white man out and sent in the black man. We have been working there from day one almost unnoticed. We are also in Indonesia for the short term because of the Indonesian attitude as well as Sri Lanka.

We will do whatever we are allowed because the money is available and we will do jobs we feel we can stand over. However, I am not sure how far we will be allowed to go. Therefore, I cannot answer the question because it is an imponderable. We will stay for the medium to long term because every life is important and must be restored to the way it was prior to the tsunami. Any aid agency, however good or big it thinks it is, will not get to all the people. I estimate that more than 60,000 are waiting to be rescued on islands in Indonesia. No entity or person on the planet is putting pressure on the Indonesians to allow helicopters to travel to these places. That is the situation faced by the international community.

I hear questions about Africa but there is a period of mourning. One does not ask the widow to dance the week after she buries her husband. The Irish people have done something incredible. It is not their responsibility to help in Darfur or elsewhere, for which we have been screaming for support for many years. The bloody United Nations has sat on its backside in recent years. It has not sent a single soldier to Darfur to protect almost 2 million people. That is its responsibility and it should not be hived off to the Irish people. If more of them sat in the corridors of power at the United Nations, the world would be a better place. It is the responsibility of the United Nations and the international community at large to worry about all the tragedies, including Darfur and the Congo, not the Irish people. We have bled them and they have responded.

The Government has done a good job in that it has provided money for the agencies. The reference to robbing Peter to pay Paul is nonsense. I am absolutely confident the Taoiseach, the Minister for Foreign Affairs and the Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs, Deputy Conor Lenihan, will give the agencies on the ground a blank cheque if that is what we need to do our job. I have spent a great deal of my life criticising Governments but now and then a Government deserves praise and on this occasion money will be available to us. However, we must first be certain we have the capacity, given what is on the ground and what we will be allowed to do, to reach those in greatest need.

Sometimes good comes from an appalling disaster. I am almost at the point of praying common sense will finally descend on the people who make decisions in this crazy world of ours. That the world does not have a rapid response force belies logic. Every damn village and hamlet on the globe has a fire brigade but the world does not have a fire brigade service. It is left to us. Some day we might play golf and decide not to bother. When I first received a telephone call about this, I was togging out for a veterans game in Blackrock on St. Stephen's Day. I came in and had a good few pints. When one of my men rang from India, I said, "The Indians will take care of that, let me go back to the bar." Had I stayed there, our 50 GOALies — vastly experienced doctors, nurses and engineers — would not be doing the best they can in the countries involved but it should not be up to us because we not are not the answer to the prodigious problems of the Third World, despite the herculean effort our people will put in for which they deserve credit. This is a problem for the international community. If the Minister for Foreign Affairs does nothing else in his career, I implore him to force the international community to immediately establish a world fire brigade service in order that the next time there is a tragedy, this group will spring into action with all the facilities and equipment that we do not have.

We do not carry JCBs in our back pockets. It is enough trouble for us to carry a beer opener. We are expected to fight the Battle of the Somme with 20 or 30 troops which is ludicrous. This was a military scale operation from day one but we did not get a rapid response force. The black man, the poorest of the poor, has always suffered in tragedies such as this and the international community never gave a damn but this time the people were white and rich. All of a sudden things have changed but I say this in a positive light. I hope out of this nightmare will come the realisation that every life is precious and that a rapid response force must be put in place. If the Minister for Foreign Affairs, backed by the Taoiseach and the Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs, Deputy Conor Lenihan, can achieve this, then Ireland will have done something significant.

Mr. David Andrews

I congratulate the Chairman and his colleagues for taking this initiative. It gives all of us an opportunity to share our ideas with the committee and fellow aid agencies. I commend Trócaire, GOAL and Concern on the work they have done on this disaster.

Today's invitation is timely in the sense that there is a global conference on disasters, which opened today in the city of Kobe, Japan, on the tenth anniversary of that city's earthquake which claimed more than 6,000 lives. Little did we know when the conference was planned that this figure, which represents intense personal tragedy and loss, would be dwarfed by the gargantuan scale of what has happened in the past three weeks, which has resulted in approximately 160,000 lives being lost, 2.5 million people being forced to leave their homes and 27,000 people still listed as missing across 12 countries.

"The best way to honour the dead is to protect the living" is what today's conference was told by the United Nations Secretary General of Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Co-ordination. Therefore, I propose to briefly outline what action the Red Cross and Red Crescent Movements worldwide took on the day of the disaster and in the three intervening weeks. We must take on board this direction from the UN and consider what John O'Shea said, much of which I agree with and some with which I disagree. The Kobe conference learned that an early warning system for the Indian Ocean region would cost approximately €40 million, yet this expenditure must be tied into a bottom-up approach to community involvement, ensuring that this high tech solution is not a stand alone defence, but rather an asset that is plugged into a wider network involving the education of children, training in first aid and leadership and the construction of buildings, particularly civic buildings such as hospitals and schools which are robust enough to withstand most, if not all, natural disasters.

Failure to involve communities will simply build a modern-day Maginot Line that will fall very short of the wholesale bulwark against death and destruction which is urgently needed. Make no mistake, what we have seen in recent weeks will happen again. The UN, and our own research in our annual Red Cross and Red Crescent world disasters report has consistently tracked a rising trend in natural disasters. Some 2.5 billion people have been affected by natural disasters in the past ten years alone, an increase of approximately 60% on previous years. Floods and earthquakes account for more than half the total casualties and Asia is by far the most affected continent, accounting for 90% of all the casualties and homeless. Yet high finances are not at stake here. Many members may not be aware, for instance, that it takes just US $1,000, or approximately €750 at today's exchange rate, to build a seismically safe house, or €10 euro would buy 6,600 purification tablets, which is quite a lifesaver when one realises that, leaving this disaster aside, ordinarily more than 2.2 million people die worldwide each year from dirty water.

From day one of the disaster — St. Stephen's Day — the Red Cross and Red Crescent movement, both locally in the countries affected and internationally throughout our global movement of 181 members, immediately swung into action. To understand how we were able to do this, I will briefly outline the work we have undertaken. Our movement comprises three elements. First, there are the national societies, of which we have 11 in the 12 countries affected. These people are skilled and practised at disaster management work in their own areas in providing medical treatment for the injured, transport to hospital, distributing aid and reuniting separated families. Second, the umbrella body that co-ordinates and represents the national societies to third parties such as the UN and governments is the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies. Third, the organisation familiar to many of us through its work in accordance with its specific mandate laid down by the Geneva Conventions is the International Committee of the Red Cross. From the very first hours of this disaster, our national societies in Indonesia, Sri Lanka, Thailand and all the other countries affected, with the exception of the Maldives, which does not have its own national Red Cross or Red Crescent Society, dealt with the immediate effects of death, injury and separation of loved ones. They were supported in this by the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, which quickly mobilised the readiness of other national societies, such as ourselves in the Irish Red Cross, to back up their work. The International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies also deployed an emergency response unit to the Maldives to investigate how we as a global movement could help the unfortunate and tragic people on that small island.

This ERU is one of 14 such specialist Red Cross-Red Crescent international teams deployed in the countries affected by this disaster. The specialisation in conflict of the International Committee of the Red Cross, which already had programmes in at least three of the countries affected — Indonesia, Sri Lanka and Myanmar, formerly Burma — ensured that there was already a well informed and expert group of international specialists based in these countries prior to this disaster. This structure and modus operandi is central to the range of works we are undertaking at present in the affected countries. It is based on a commitment that is long term and rooted in local communities. To date the Irish Red Cross has raised €13.5 million. We intend to channel this money to the areas most affected by this catastrophe. We believe that, with our unique combination of both local and global expertise, we have the means to ensure that it is spent where it is most needed. This money will go a long way towards reaching the global target of €119 million sought by the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies over the next six months.

With the recovery of bodies continuing to this day, there is no doubt but that more money will be required for much longer than merely six months from this date. We will be guided in this by what our colleagues in the local Red Cross and Red Crescent communities that were most affected by this disaster tell us they need through our international organisations. We respect Concern's position on this and the integrity of its chief executive and what he said. That is the route it must take and we respect that. We respect the integrity of that decision.

With close to one million voluntary members of the Indonesian Red Crescent and 5,000 voluntary members of the Sri Lankan Red Cross, to give just two examples, we are confident their local knowledge will be central to our planned expenditure. As my friend, the Secretary General of the Irish Red Cross, Ms Carmel Dunne, reported after her visit to the area with the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Dermot Ahern, and our colleagues here, the work she saw being done by ordinary people in their own communities is quite extraordinary by any standards, as already stated by those who witnessed the situation first hand with the Minister, particularly in view of what they have gone through.

I commend the Government and our excellent Minister for Foreign Affairs for this historic and heroic visit to these blighted countries. I conclude by thanking the chairman for his invitation and by placing on the record of this House my deep appreciation to the people of our country, to which Mr. John O'Shea adverted, for their great generosity and my commitment to them and to members of the committee that the moneys raised will be used wisely and well.

Chairman

Thank you. A number of members indicated that they would like to make a contribution.

Deputy Carey

I welcome the delegation from the NGOs and compliment them on the work they are doing. No words of ours could express our gratitude for the way they have responded massively and almost instantaneously, which is in the spirit of the work they have been doing down through the years.

In response to Mr. O'Shea's comment, Henry Kissinger asked many years ago who would he pick when he wanted to ring someone in Europe.

Mr. O’Shea

He should have picked up the phone to the devil because that was the type of company he was keeping.

Chairman

Deputy Carey, without interruption, please.

Deputy Carey

I do not disagree with Mr. O'Shea on that point. I agree with the thrust of what he has been saying today and for some time now. On the face of it, we have a watchdog and co-ordinating body, the United Nations. However, we have reached the stage where it is being strangled by the biggest power in the world. Much energy needs to be put into reform of the United Nations. I am not certain re-inventing the wheel by setting up a rapid response force is the answer. I wish it were. Mr. O'Shea will know how difficult it is to get even a semblance of a rapid reaction force in the European Union. We will have an opportunity to put our toe in the water later this year or early next year in terms of the future tightening up of European foreign policy. It is regrettable we are not in a position to respond more quickly.

While I presume the NGOs remain involved in Bam how many people remember the earthquake that took place there? The cameras are gone, given it happened some time ago. What aid is being provided for Bam? I am concerned that when Sky News and others move to the next interesting story, concentration of the effort is left to the organisations. It is for that reason I would like to pose a couple of questions.

I heard mentioned in debates, in which some of the organisations were involved, the possibility of promoting a martial type plan approach to the disaster. Is that possible or is the area too disparate in terms of implementing a martial type plan? I am aware there are downsides as well as upsides to a martial plan. What is the NGOs' view in terms of Ireland's short-term and long-term involvement? We are currently at stage one of trying to rescue and reconstruct the area. What is the position regarding long-term reconstruction? Assuming the political situation allows, how do the NGOs view Ireland's engagement in that part of the world in the medium to longer term? I do not wish to be trite but, perhaps, the easy part of the work is done or is under way. The situation is tragic but work is under way. How does Ireland, with a tradition of long term engagement, contribute to the rebuilding of the region in the longer term given the political difficulties?

Is Ireland spreading itself thinly by engaging in more countries? A great deal of money has been collected. How can it be usefully spent over a long period? Education will be a big issue. Environmental issues will also be important and will need to be addressed. Many of the issues will need to be addressed by governments. Ireland will not remain in the International Red Cross forever. We must engage in enabling local communities to rebuild. Do we have particular expertise in areas such as fishing, setting up co-operatives and empowering women's organisations for example? Can we engage in those areas?

An issue recently raised at a meeting of this committee about which members were not too keen is the position in Burma. Can we intervene in a constructive way with our international partners to try to address the issue of human rights in Burma? The situation in that regard is unsatisfactory. There is no point pretending otherwise. The delegation from Trocaire mentioned the issue of debt cancellation. A question in that regard is that of accumulation of interest. Ireland could play a useful role in stressing the need for debt cancellation rather than debt relief. My questions relate in the main to Ireland's long-term involvement and how we, as a nation, can respond to such areas.

Mr. O’Shea

Do we respond at this point?

Chairman

No.

Deputy Quinn

I wish to extend the apologies of my colleague, Deputy Michael D. Higgins, who is unable to be with us this afternoon. My voice is a less authoritative one than his on these matters. I thank the Chairman for his initiative and endorse the comments of various speakers regarding our not wishing to prolong our deliberations.

This committee and other committees of the House could take some concrete steps, informed by what Mr. O'Shea and others had to say, through the limited but essential action relief agencies take and which provide a more structured and long-term intervention to this type of natural calamity or crisis. We can be sure we will see similar again but when, how and where none of us can predict.

I do not share Mr. O'Shea's optimism in terms of the United Nations getting its act together because there are so many factors out of its control. However, we control the European Union to the extent that we are participants and the European Union is committed to a rapid reaction force. It is appropriate this issue is being discussed today with the unveiling of the A380 super jumbo jet, which could have transported 800 troops to provide the emergency intervention work required in this instance.

I raise the next issue consciously, as a former leader of the Labour Party and as a person who comes from a tradition that has been very squeamish about neutrality and participation in European armies and a post imperialist role, because it has resonances from the past. However, I was, as a European, ashamed we did not have the capacity to intervene in parts of the world where previously European and United States influence had existed. I agree with Mr. O'Shea who rightly and properly stated that they were able wholeheartedly to throw their troops into the human tragedy of the battlefield of the regions affected.

Ireland — not just the Labour Party but others also — needs to come to terms with its ambiguity about the capacity for Europe to have an ability to intervene in humanitarian terms in far flung parts of the world. It is not an imperialist adventure; it is humanitarian necessity. That issue needs to be debated and I put myself to the front in that regard given the Labour Party's position on that in the past. We cannot berate other countries if we do not have the European capacity to provide aid. We should provide ourselves with that capacity and should do so in a more effective manner than in the past. The Minister for Defence, Deputy O'Dea, has stated we cannot fully and properly participate in any one of the European battle groups. That is an indictment of the way in which we have become involved in this situation. I do not want the European Union to become a superpower, rather I want it to become a super-influence. We must make that distinction. We have not yet reached that position.

In so far as we control our own sovereignty within the European Union, I suggest that this committee, in conjunction with the Joint Committee on European Affairs, consider how we can take on board the observations from agencies who, with all due respect, will be the first to admit they are the elastoplast on the field of immediate humanitarian response and are not long term solutions and do not purport to be so. I invite the Chairman to consult the Joint Committee on European Affairs in terms of our examining what lessons can be learned from this going forward.

The second lesson relates to the point raised by Mr. Justin Kilcullen in terms of trade and about allowing people to earn their way into prosperity. We can ensure, as Deputy Carey said, support is provided to enable communities to rebuild fishing co-operatives and so on but if there are no international markets into which they can sell goods and services they will not earn their way back into prosperity. The figures provided by Mr. Kilcullen in the document before us are frightening. Our citizens will become very cynical and disillusioned. Their generosity cannot be presumed upon if, on the one hand they dig deeply into their pockets, as we have seen them do in an unprecedented manner in recent weeks, while on the other hand protectionism in the Doha round etc. prevents Third World countries from trading their way into prosperity.

The aid component of our transactions with the Third World represents a fraction of what the countries in question could earn if we let them. We could readily afford to compensate the inevitable European losers if we dismantled our system of protection. We should take that on board and assure our farming and other communities that in an act of solidarity with our own citizens while creating worldwide solidarity no Irish or European community will uniquely carry the brunt of action in this area. They should be assured that the consequential costs of the liberalisation of trade in protected areas will be dealt with humanely and properly.

How we deal with these matters affects our trade Commissioner in the lead up to the Doha Round and has an impact on the IFA and other organisations. Sugar beet growers across Munster are confronted with this as we speak. It is a real issue. We are talking about approximately 5,000 sugar beet farmers alone not to mention the workers in Carlow whose jobs have gone after the guts of 70 years. While these are real, local problems to which we can relate, there is an enormously important worldwide dimension to consider. We must confront the issue at both levels to obtain a win-win solution rather than a scenario in which there are winners and losers. If there are to be winners and losers and the losers are in our backyard, the realpolitik with which we are all familiar will ensure we duck, dive, compromise and fail to produce the required solution.

They are the two matters which emerge immediately. While the heroism and dedication of volunteers reflected by all of the agencies involved goes without saying, we are hearing very loudly and clearly of the need for a structural, structured response to the next disaster. While I would love to see it coming from the United Nations, I do not share Mr. John O'Shea's opinion, though he is not necessarily optimistic in his predictions of the outturn. The Irish should do something concrete. There should be a capacity for 60,000 European soldiers to deploy to disaster areas like the location of the recent tsunami to carry out some of the hands-on work required in support rather than substitution for the workers already in place. We have the inclination, political aspiration and soldiers to carry this out. In the Airbus A40, we will soon have the capacity to transport those soldiers. The 25 member states of the EU have collectively dragged their heels in this area for reasons with which we are all familiar. If there is an overriding lesson to be learned from the crisis in terms of our capacity to intervene, it is that Europe must become a superinfluence rather than a superpower.

Senator O’Rourke

I thank the members of the organisations for attending to give us of their knowledge in a very precise manner. The echoes of the enormity of what happened on St. Stephen's day continue to reverberate. Irish people have been generous in responding to whichever agency they felt appropriate, including the Irish Red Cross, and in the local tasks they have carried out. There continue to be dances, bring-and-buy sales and tea parties to raise funds. In that context I issue a caution in respect of the comment, which was made in all goodwill, by organisations which said they had enough for the moment. Before I set off from home this morning I was asked over the phone by someone who knew about this meeting if a party being organised for Friday night should be cancelled. While the announcement was well-intentioned in the sense that the organisations felt they had collected the money and should now concentrate on spending it well, there are volunteers making lists and calls to cajole people to come along to the next do for the people bereft by the tsunami. It is important to think of that angle rather than to say enough money has been collected and that it is time to move on to Darfur or whatever other regions in which organisations are intrinsically involved.

I issue the caution from a personal feeling. It struck me the minute I heard it that the announcement would dash the hopes of well-meaning people who are giving their all. I hope the organisations do not mind me saying so. I speak from my experience with people who have asked me whether they should forget about the matter and told me of having contacted individuals who have said they heard the organisations say they had enough money. The organisations could soft-pedal on that angle until everybody has emptied their hearts and wallets to the extent intended. The flourishing bud of generosity should not be nipped. The response of Irish people has been amazing and we should reflect it in our comments. It is part of what we are here to discuss.

Whether one went to one's local Dunnes Stores, Tesco, church or party, white buckets were produced. People came to one's door. Everyone kept giving. It was the most amazing spate of generosity I remember witnessing. People were even taking sides in the sense that they spoke of their money going to Goal or Concern or the Red Cross. It was not a bad thing that a slightly competitive edge came into the process. I thought it was good in the context of encouraging donations.

It is another day's work to consider how the organisations manage everything. It is their own business. We should pay tribute, as I am sure the Chairman would wish, to the amazing rush of generosity. As a matter of course, television helped. Unless they are complete dolts, people are affected by a programme repeated every 15 minutes and will decide to donate.

At a meeting such as this at which everyone gives a diligent account of himself or herself, the voice that says something different grabs the attention. In this case, it has been Mr. John O'Shea. I do not say that was his motivation, I point merely to the effect of a voice which is different. When one dissects what he said, one finds he was correct. After the spate of generosity must come the questions as to where the money went. People will ask whether it reached a certain village or organisation and whether it was used to feed, clothe and house people and facilitate them in earning a living. People are entitled to ask those questions having very generously given their money. The Irish people would very much appreciate details of a debit and credit account of where their money went and whom it benefitted.

I acknowledge that the organisations have worked in stages on foot of the major event and having first addressed people's need for immediate help there followed the intermediate stage we are currently at which involves the need to guarantee shelter, food and the provision of school facilities, etc. in a more structured manner. It was positive to see schools opening as there is nothing like scrubbing his or her face and sending a child to school to provide a sense of normality. While this is the worst we have faced, there will be other disasters. It is the nature of the world. No matter how much we wail about where God was when all this happened, similar events will occur again. I would like to see the organisations come together even if each has its own — I hesitate to use the word "customers" — approach. I understand this and that each organisation has finely honed its approach during the years. If we are to be ready for the next disaster, the organisations should get together and plan in a structured way what action to take to ensure the money they receive reaches the persons or places for which it is intended and that a full account is given. While they are undertaking their responsibilities marvellously, the joint committee, because it is of the people, has the responsibility to ensure this happens. Money must reach those for whom people opened their pockets, wallets, hearts and minds. We want to know exactly where this money went before the next wave of questions emerges.

This leads me to the idea of the watchdog referred to by Mr. John O'Shea. I do not believe a super watchdog or United Nations watchdog is possible when such gigantic events take place. Each organisation will have to act as watchdog over its particular swatch of money and should give people an exact account of where the money it received went. Although the documents I received when I joined the proceedings do this to an extent, the organisations should give a line by line account of who benefited.

The watchdog proposal sounds catchy but it is a good idea. Rather than stating we are able to do so much for so many, we want details on what we are able to do. We cannot expect generosity to last forever unless the aid organisations and the joint committee, acting on behalf of the Government, ensure genuine accountability on how it is spent. While none of the organisations represented would spend money in a profligate fashion, the depths of despair reached by victims and their sheer screams for help can result in an outpouring from the aid organisations as they try to get relief to the victims as quickly as possible.

The charitable organisations should not say they have received enough donations too soon or ask that money be given instead to Darfur or other regions where so many people are dying and living in terribly difficult circumstances. To do this is to dash those who are working for those who suffered as a result of the tsunami. I would not too lightly disregard the watchdog idea. While I have great faith in the United Nations and believe those who write dreadful columns giving out about it are pushing their agenda, the aid organisations should have watchdogs and give a detailed account of where the euro donated by people here went or will go.

I thank the Chairman for arranging this meeting as I would not otherwise have had an opportunity to meet the representatives of the aid organisations or listen to what they have to say.

Senator Norris

I also thank the various representatives of the different organisations. I am grateful to them for their rapid, efficient and humane response which has reflected well on the country and reflects the genuine popular mood. I notice there is no representative of the Department of Foreign Affairs present which is a pity. As the discussion has been very useful, perhaps we can arrange to have a transcript made available to the appropriate section of the Department which may also find the meeting helpful.

Chairman

We invited a representative of the Department but the person is otherwise engaged and will be available later.

Senator Norris

I understand. I suggest we make a transcript of today's meeting available to the Department. I support strongly the recommendation made by Mr. John O'Shea that the joint committee suggest the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Dermot Ahern, consider the possibility of applying to make a submission to the United Nations on the need for a more co-ordinated approach and direct accountability in the chain of command. This would be useful. Whether we become the voice of the tsunami, I could not say but it would be a useful step and a political one the joint committee could make.

I share the concern expressed by Mr. Justin Kilcullen about the diversion of money from other areas which would be wrong. Governments all over the world — I do not criticise our Government, in particular — have been shamed into increasing exponentially their support by the massive response from ordinary people. They immediately realised that people's response was deeply felt on a global basis and increasing support was very popular with the electorate. Pressure from the people resulted in an increase in the money allocated. It would be regrettable if this money were permanently diverted from what is an emergency response fund. This kind of bookkeeping exercise is not appropriate in the face of such a disaster. The fund should be replenished by the Government as soon as possible.

Considering the discrepancy between the immediacy of the response of people all over the world and the much slower and niggardly response of governments in the early days, is there an agency tracking the delivery of the promises made by governments? It makes me cynical to hear persons in positions of authority make broad promises about large sums of money on radio or in front of the cameras when, in practice, less than 50% of such promises are delivered. It is an unacceptable scandal that people can reap the political reward for making a generous promise and then renege on it. We should receive information on countries that welsh on these matters.

I found all the submissions, particularly that of GOAL, clear, direct and practical. We know where the money is going; it is buying boats and fishing nets, erecting sanitary facilities and so forth. This is excellent. I compliment the organisations.

I am in the surprising and unusual position of disagreeing with Mr. John O'Shea on the question of whether the response is simply because European people and western people generally were involved in this tragedy. I do not believe that is the real story. In some cases, it is true we only became involved when we identified with a tragedy. However, there were some unusual elements to this disaster. It was widespread in a geographical sense in that it affected an entire area of the world on different sides of the Indian Ocean. It was also concentrated in time, given that it took place in one huge slam. In addition, it was witnessed on television almost contemporaneously. These were three important factors. The response was so enormous from such a widespread section of the global population that I cannot believe it was due to our selfish belief a few Irish or Swedish people were involved. I believe it was a genuine global response on which we should capitalise.

While the United Nations is imperfect, it has been undermined. We should continue to support it because it is our hope. If there is to be an emergency or rapid response group, it should be under the direction of the United Nations and not of the United States of America. However, I was very glad to hear John O'Shea praise the American army. I am relieved to see it can work well in a humanitarian context and that it delivered the helicopters that were essential. They had the hardware and they made it available. I would just add a little warning; after Mr. Wolfowitz's visit they immediately began to talk of withdrawing from the area, pulling the plug and cancelling their co-operation. That is the same kind of rubbish that we get from the "newcons" in America: "Let it be the charity of our people, the governments do not have to be involved." However, they most certainly do. Even from their own self-interested point of view it would be good for Americans as it might disinfect their army from some of the other capers they have got up to in Iraq and places like that.

I very much welcome today's discussion on wide-ranging areas such as fair trade. It is astonishing and disgusting for me to learn that some of the wealthiest nations on the Earth in terms of income per capita have a 12 times advantage in economic deals with the European Union and so on over Sri Lanka. We have got to root this thing out. It exists at an institutional structural level and we as politicians are responsible for it.

I thank those who made submissions, which I found to be extremely valuable and helpful. As an ordinary Irish person I am very proud of the work they have done and thank them for it. I repeat my two practical suggestions that we make the minutes of the meeting available to the relevant section of the Department of Foreign Affairs and second, that we encourage our colleague, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Dermot Ahern, for whom there was also strong praise from John O'Shea, if it is possible, to seek the right to address the United Nations or the Security Council on the need for a co-ordinated response on this matter.

Deputy F. McGrath

I thank the Chairman and the committee for calling a meeting to discuss this issue. I welcome the aid groups and commend them for their work. The Independent group in Dáil Éireann strongly supports the aid groups and is willing to assist them in any way possible.

I am not surprised by the generosity of the Irish people in recent weeks. The history of famine in this country is lodged in people's minds. It is part of our psyche even though we are now a very wealthy country. As a result, when disasters occur we are more likely to give generously. Trust and confidence are also part of the equation. People will be generous as long as they believe the money donated will go to the most needy people. That is an important part of today's debate.

How much of the money raised in recent weeks from Trócaire, Concern and the Red Cross has been spent on services, food, tents, etc? John O'Shea referred to the major issues of corruption, bureaucracy and waste. What can we as legislators do to assist and to act as a watchdog in regard to such issues?

He also referred to the responsibilities of the United Nations rather than the Irish people. However, when one criticises the UN for its lack of action and at times inefficiencies, basically one is being critical of the governments of the world, which must include our Government. The Government's aim should be to demand radical reform of the United Nations to make it more relevant to people in poorer countries.

I agree with what John O'Shea said about the fire brigade concept, which I consider to be a good one. I disagree with what Deputy Carey said on this issue. Many of us are cynical and suspicious of the major powers that can go to war by invading countries such as Iraq within 48 hours, bringing large amounts of people, tents, medicines and field hospitals but cannot bring the same sense of urgency to bear in an African country experiencing famine. We need a reaction force but it should be under the control of the United Nations. It needs to be under the control of people who are genuinely interested in aid who do not have a political agenda. We should push for this on an international level. There is a significant and understandable mistrust of the West in the Asian world and among other cultures.

Justin Kilcullen referred in his submission to the role of Caritas I would like to know more about how it operates. How does Trócaire distribute its funds through Caritas on the ground? Is it a question of a couple of dozen people or a couple of hundred people being involved in this regard?

Howard Dalzell from Concern praised the Sri Lankan Government but I have concerns about the areas that are controlled by the Tamil Tigers. Is aid getting through to the most needy? We must keep a close eye on this issue.

Has John O'Shea been called up to play on the football team that will take on the Oireachtas on Wednesday 26 January in Dalymount Park?

Mr. O’Shea

I did not get a call but I am in training.

Deputy Carey

He is in the sin bin.

Deputy F. McGrath

I remind everyone that the Oireachtas team will play on 26 January in Dalymount Park against an FAI selection and some people involved in sports journalism. All the money will go to the aid organisations. It will be an historic night when famous GAA players will play soccer in Dalymount Park.

Chairman

I will not be at the game as we will be somewhere in Israel or Palestine at the time but we will give some money towards it.

Senator Mooney

The last time I came up against John O'Shea was when I played in goal, not GOAL, many years ago. He came thundering in and buried me, not the ball, in the back of the net. I hope we will not meet him.

At the height of the disaster, Médecins Sans Frontières uniquely stated it did not want any more money. I did not catch all the earlier suggestions but my colleague Senator O'Rourke referred to a perception that aid agencies were no longer looking for money. Is there enough money to deal with the problem? The reason Médecins Sans Frontières said that was that it did not have the capacity to spend any more money so it did not want people to donate any more to it. The Sunday Times published a poignant report by one of its journalists about the situation in Aceh where people, especially the young were dying of TB because of a lack of basic medicines. Why are the aid agencies not there? Why do these people have to die? Basic oxygen tents, for example, are required. When the one doctor who had a medicine kit left, children died. As far as I am concerned, that took the gloss off all the wonderful aid work.

I thought Justin Kilcullen would focus specifically on debt reduction. All the reports I read suggested that many of these countries, notwithstanding the severe economic difficulties in which they find themselves, would be better off if they had preferential trade agreements. I am glad he did get around to making the point but his focus should be more emphatic that there should be preferential trade not debt reduction. Those who raised this issue said that the British Government has spent more than £8.5 billion on the war in Iraq. Left to its own devices, that country would flourish and be prosperous. The problem is not necessarily with the country per se, the administration is often to blame as John O’Shea regularly says.

The aid agencies should focus more on calling for a debt moratorium. The governments of the West are making suggestions in this regard but preferential trade is the key. It is the key not only in Asian countries but also in Africa, as the delegates know without having to remind them. They have been saying it themselves.

Simon Jenkins wrote a pithy article in the Irish Independent a couple of weeks ago, the opening paragraph of which quoted a statement by Bob Geldof in the immediate aftermath of the Band Aid initiative of 1984. After all the money had been raised, Mr. Geldof stated: “Is that it?” He asked whether the fund-raising was over. Of course, it was not. Mr. Jenkins expressed the view that the people of the world follow the television crews as they reported on a certain crisis and then moved on to the next one. The aid agencies are left to address disasters when the media lose interest. Is there a danger of this happening?

I certainly agree with Mr. John O'Shea that Ireland has considerable credibility as a small country that punches above its weight internationally. His suggestion about the Government going to the United Nations is valuable. This committee might be able to lend its weight to it through a resolution which I am sure could be worked out.

I, like everybody else, feel very proud to be Irish when I consider the wonderful work all the delegates and their representatives have done. Given my relative security in Ireland, I cannot comprehend — I have tried — what it must be like to be a young aid worker operating in the aftermath of the tsunami. If there are criteria under which the delegates' people on the ground could be canonised for their commitment and dedication, they come close to being met. I am not trying to be patronising in this regard.

The delegates know the stories about the volunteers because they are dealing directly with them. I, as a member of the public, was very impressed to read about people who had dropped everything at a moment's notice in order that they could offer assistance. Doctors, nurses and aid workers relocated from areas in which they had been based. Others left the security of their homes and sold assets to raise funds. Some gave up money for holidays and got on an aeroplane to one of the affected countries.

One sad story in The Sunday Times concerns a nurse dealing with dying kids and her frustration over the lack of medical equipment. The photographs of the conditions were published if the committee wants to examine them. The nurse decided to go to the region at a moment’s notice because she had relevant expertise. When she arrived at the airport, the airline which she did not name insisted on charging her for excess baggage, although her baggage contained medical equipment and supplies. The airline was not mentioned in the article but it should be shamed for this. This episode was one black spot in the stories of goodness and charity. I do not want to labour the point too much but, notwithstanding what I just stated, it must be noted the questions being raised are real and relevant, ones the delegates themselves are asking.

The agencies will have overwhelming support for what they are attempting to do. I reiterate that I feel proud of what they are doing in the region affected by the tsunami and in Africa, especially Darfur. We all bask in the reflected glory of their activities. However, as I stated, I cannot comprehend the commitment and dedication of the volunteers, what moves them and the manner in which they carry out their work. I wish the delegations continued success.

Senator Bradford

I will be brief because I am aware of the time restrictions. I congratulate all the representatives for the outstanding work their various organisations have been doing on this and other projects during the years. It is fair to state there has been a tremendous Irish response to the tsunami crisis. It was a Christmas tragedy covered live on television and it gripped not only this nation but also the rest of the world. We can be very proud that the Irish have dug so deep into their pockets to respond financially. However, we must be careful on this front because if the money we raise is the yardstick, we are certainly asking the wrong question. We must reflect on the fact that there have been tragedies of almost similar proportions elsewhere during the years which provoked a response but that this response is not in any way complete from the perspective of those in the countries that suffered.

While we cannot rewrite history, we must work to ensure it is not repeated and that the response is not just a short-term one but much more long-term and effective. We must address the issue of co-ordination. I welcome what Mr. John O'Shea had to say in this regard. When one talks about lack of co-ordination, one must reflect on the fact that no single entity, person or agency seems to be in complete charge. We must consider the role of the United Nations but doing so is sometimes regarded as politically sensitive. To be critical of it is regarded as a sin by some of the politically correct. In respect of tragedies such as the tsunami and the conflicts in Sudan and elsewhere, the response of the United Nations is certainly not sufficient. Senator O'Rourke asked what could be done when the fund-raising was complete. What we do must be part of a political response. The Government has a challenge and a great opportunity, at EU and UN level, to lead the charge for a much more co-ordinated response to the tsunami crisis and other crises that will inevitably arise.

I welcome Mr. John O'Shea's comment that aid agencies should not be solely responsible for responding. It should not be their job alone but also that of governments. The tsunami represents an international crisis to which there should be a co-ordinated political response. The current response does not seem to be sufficient which should be of concern to us.

We must reflect on the way in which money is being spent on crises such as that in question. When one does so, one can be wrongly accused of penny-pinching or subjecting the issue to Department of Finance-like microscopic investigation. When we are questioning value for money, we are really asking whether the person in the midst of the tsunami crisis is receiving the best response from the international community. A positive response is obviously being offered but we must try to ensure the most effective response possible. Therefore, we must monitor spending.

Another subject about which this committee often speaks is that of monitoring of democracy and elections worldwide and the Irish and European role in this regard. We have people on the ground monitoring politics but we should also have people on the ground monitoring the way in which money is being spent. These individuals should not only examine the amount spent but ensure value is obtained.

In the midst of this crisis the aid agencies are trying to bring help and hope to countries that, in many cases, do not have democratic institutions. Where there is despair, poverty and a lack of good governance, there is inevitably some corruption and people who will, if afforded an opportunity, syphon off aid being poured into the country. It is not in our interest but in that of the suffering people of the countries affected that we try to ensure the funds sent to them are spent properly. That is why we need a very precise monitoring system.

Perhaps one of the groups might respond to the broader question of how Ireland responds. We have agencies and other NGOs. However, as Deputy Pat Carey said, perhaps there is a need for a more specific Irish response. There are areas in which Ireland is a world leader, for example, in the field of agriculture programmes and education programmes. Deputy Carey mentioned the broad marine front. The question is whether Ireland's response should be country specific or area specific.

It is nice that Ireland is, in a small way, spreading hope and help in many countries world-wide, and no more can be expected. However, perhaps Ireland should try to be more area specific so that the level of Irish expertise, professionalism and monitoring could ensure the best result is achieved for the people who most need it. It is not a question of satisfying our own conscience. We are all delighted to throw a euro into a collection bucket. It is a short-term salve to our own sense of inadequacy. However, we must put structures in place to ensure the global response is the correct one and that it is immediate and effective. That requires much more than money. It requires a political response.

Like Senator Norris, I welcome what the American troops are doing on the ground. We often disagree regarding American policy worldwide. However, I hope that when President Bush is inaugurated at the weekend he will, in his inauguration address setting out his stall for the next four years, include a significant section on how the United States intends to respond not just to this crisis but to poverty, Third World and trade issues. We may not like it that the United States polices the world today, but it does and it has a huge responsibility to change its approach to aid and Third World issues. I hope we will see some positive change of direction signalled in the Bush inauguration address in a few days' time.

Chairman

We have had very extensive coverage. I thank the representatives of the NGOs for the in-depth treatment they have given us today from their immediate experience, knowledge and understanding of the issues. It has been very helpful to the committee. We have everything recorded. While we cannot go back over everything, perhaps each of the NGOs would comment briefly at this stage, starting with Mr. Kilcullen.

Mr. Kilcullen

A couple of quick comments occur to me. One relates to rebuilding of the fishing industry. When the Minister met with the Interior Minister in Thailand he raised this issue with him and, being a good politician, the Interior Minister immediately responded by saying that there was not much point in having a fishing industry unless they were able to sell their fish. He made the point about access to European markets for fisheries. It is a real issue. I appreciate that the point we made today has been remarked upon by members of the committee. Trade is absolutely critical.

Senator O'Rourke's point regarding collections was well made. We have had to clarify to people who phoned us that we are not asking for further donations. That is not to say we are not receiving them. It is very important that people's solidarity be expressed. I am sure all of the agencies are more than willing to continue to receive funds from all the efforts that have been planned and which, I am sure, will be carried out.

Regarding the delivery of pledges, we asked through the Minister for Foreign Affairs when he went to the EU meeting of Foreign Ministers, that the European Commission establish a mechanism by which members of the European Union who make pledges in this regard are held to account. The European Commission is a body that could put that in place within its overall aid policy and mechanisms.

On the rapid reaction force, I would like to add a word of caution. I agree that in an emergency there should be the capacity to respond. There is another issue and that is the militarisation of aid. Governments with an agenda will not be slow to avail of opportunities that humanitarian and other crises afford them to exploit those for their own political ends. We are seeing that in Afghanistan and in Iraq where it is impossible for aid agencies to operate or where they are in grave danger when they are operating because they are seen to be in on the back of a military operation and there is no distinction in the local people's minds between the neutrality of aid workers and the presence of military forces. While this is an important issue, it needs to be thought through. The protocols around a rapid reaction force will need to be very rigorous.

Perhaps that is sufficient from myself and maybe other speakers will take up these and other points.

Mr. Arnold

I will start where Justin started in response to Mary O'Rourke's comment. None of us wants to stop people raising funds. When I said what I did on Friday, I specifically said——

Senator O’Rourke

I admired your honesty about it.

Mr. Arnold

That was not the intention. I also said that if anybody had something planned they should please go ahead and carry it out. I was also attempting, as the Senator says, to be honest about it because in certain places, specifically India, there are issues regarding whether all the money that is available can be spent. We should be honest about that because down the road there may be problems in that regard, so it is better to be honest and up-front.

There is much discussion on the question of a rapid reaction force and an international capacity to respond to disasters. It is important that this matter is put on the table and discussed so that improvements can be put in place. It is too easy, however, to criticise the UN. Sometimes comments do not take account of the organisation that is in place, UNOCHA, United Nations Organisation for the Co-ordination of Humanitarian Affairs, which is charged at UN level with co-ordinating. The way forward here, as Senator David Norris said, is to support this, to demand that there is overall reform of the UN to improve the situation that is in place, specifically in regard to dealing with emergencies.

This is where Deputy Ruairí Quinn's point about Europe making its contribution comes into play. There is no question but that Europe has a responsibility to improve its capacity to respond. This is a wider debate for the politicians and they will have to face up to it. I am not getting into that debate. What is certain is that Europe must improve its capacity, and that can be done within the framework of UN mandates. Europe must do that.

There is another factor which is not mentioned when these matters are discussed. That is the sovereignty of the countries to whom aid is brought. Last week we saw, particularly in Thailand and in Sri Lanka, governments that were in charge of their situation, that were very clear as to what they wanted to do, that appeared to have the capacity to do it and were themselves co-ordinating the help being brought to them. If we are talking about improving on international capacity, we need to acknowledge this factor also.

Deputy Carey asked an important question as to whether a Marshall Plan approach was required. I do not believe so in the case of the tsunami disaster. However, a Marshall Plan approach is needed in connection with some of the bigger development issues. We have the framework within which to fit such a approach. It is called the millennium development goals. Later this evening we will see the launch in the Department of Foreign Affairs of yesterday's report presented to Kofi Annan on how to achieve these goals. It will be on the table as we move forward this year. Is the world committed to their achievement? What contribution do developing countries have to make to this and, within it, what can Ireland contribute? That is where Senator Bradford's point is well made. As a country, we must decide what we can most effectively do to contribute. This involves making choices. We have special expertise in certain areas which we should try to hold. This goes beyond what the Government can do. It is trying to see whether a collective national effort could be made to make that contribution to those areas where we can have most impact.

Mr. Dalzell

Regarding the rapid reaction force, when one is faced with an extreme crisis, one naturally looks for one big answer. We do not have a national fire brigade service in Ireland. However, every town in Ireland has such a service. Armies do not go into an area within 48 hours. It takes from three to six weeks from the time they are told they are going in. They are not as quick as local responses.

A long-term approach in disaster-prone areas which equips local governments for preparedness and response is likely to be much less costly and much more effective. Building local capacity is something we know works in getting rid of poverty and in responding to disasters it is invaluable. It must be remembered also that the country where most damage was caused is one that a rapid reaction force would not easily have got into. Such a force would have done almost no good in India and very little good in Sri Lanka because local capacity was adequate. I know this. I lived in India for 17 years and know what local capacity is. The politics of Indonesia are the problem. In such circumstances a political answer must be found, long before a tsunami comes.

There was a question about conflict in Sri Lanka and the Tamils and whether aid was getting through. It depends on who one listens to and believes. It will be a long time before Gerry Adams and big Ian agree about anything in the North. It will be a long time before the Tamil Tigers and the Sri Lankan Government agree about anything in Sri Lanka. However, according to our people on the ground in the north of Sri Lanka, aid is getting through but there are hitches. There will always be hitches but the political problem is not preventing aid getting to those who need it.

On the question of accountability, again, there is the big bang answer and the suggestion that there will be somebody, one person, who will keep a tab. It is easy to suggest somebody must control this. Development Co-operation Ireland and the Department of Foreign Affairs are playing a major role in this. The United Nations works through its member agencies such as UNICEF and the World Food Programme. The Government has representatives on the boards of these agencies. Ireland has had a major initiative to make sure they are accountable. That is where one begins in achieving accountability. It must be built from the bottom instead of always looking for a quick fix at the top.

To return to a point we have made in the past few days, the tsunami was terrible. It killed 150,000 people. However, 30,000 children will die today and every day this week through poverty. One cannot stop tsunamis from coming but we can send poverty packing. The things that will send it packing are the things about which we have been talking this afternoon. They include getting rid of debt, dealing seriously with conflicts, increasing aid and trade. We must put the same determination and perseverance into sending poverty packing as we have into the tsunami.

Mr. O’Shea

I will be brief because we are all rushing. I think Senator Norris misunderstood me when I spoke about the reasons there was such an outpouring of generosity. I probably mentioned only one. There is a whole rake of them, not least the heartfelt generosity of the Irish people which, as we know, is incredible. I forgot to mention television for one reason or another. It had a huge effect.

Senator O’Rourke

Yes. There were broadcasts every 15 minutes.

Mr. O’Shea

Lest people think the response was because there were white people there, it was not. That is just one reason. It was also the fact that it was on television.

The issue of sovereignty was mentioned. I have long felt the sovereignty of a human being's life is infinitely more important than the sovereignty of a nation. I have never understood the views on sovereignty. I worked in the Simon Community before I started GOAL and remember breaking down doors in Mountjoy Square when it was a derelict place because I knew there were guys there who were beating their wives. I did not ask for permission. Similarly, if this place went up in smoke, the fire brigade would not ask for permission from the Taoiseach or whoever runs this gig. It would knock down the door and would not give a damn whether one was a politician, a journalist or an aid worker. The fireman would rescue the people in greatest need. That is the way the world should be run if we were on a proper planet but we are not. Therefore, talk of sovereignty is a heap of nonsense and always has been. It is an excuse used by governments and bodies such as the inept United Nations to do nothing. If George Bush's or Tony Blair's children went off to some God forsaken island in Indonesia without telling anyone exactly where they were going because they were in love or whatever, and were there when the tsunami happened, I guarantee that the skies above Indonesia would be full of helicopters and there would be no talk of local sovereignty. They would send the best they have because they care. It would be about love. There is no love involved in this area. It is a case of sending out a platoon. Where love is concerned, one sends out the fire brigade. Let us, therefore, forget about sovereignty.

A rapid response force should be in place. Deputy Quinn's suggestion of a EU force is the obvious answer because who else is it going to protect? Is it going to protect us from the lads in south Kerry or something? What is the reason for a European army? I do not know. No one has explained it to me. Why should it not do something practical and useful? That is the first job it should do.

Senator O'Rourke's comments on accountability were absolutely spot on. The Irish people will want to be reassured about accountability because this is a long day that could go on for generations. The generosity shown by them can be repeated by their children and their grandchildren. Accountability is, therefore, very important.

Deputy Carey mentioned pledges. Bam was promised $1.7 billion. It received $18 million. That is because nobody is monitoring. Somebody suggested an agency could monitor. Agencies do not have the clout to do this. This is a job for the top echelons on the world stage. Agencies are not at that level. We cannot accuse governments of reneging. We can send out a statement. Does the committee think they will listen to us? Pledges are very important.

Corruption is very real. I had my eye operation because one could meet people in the Third World who would take the contact lens out of one's eyes and put it back in while one was still talking to them. They are masters at it. We think we have a corruption problem here. We are not even in primary school compared to the corruption in the Third World. I do not have the answer but the more people on the ground monitoring it, the better. I think it was Senator Bradford who made a good point about the monitoring of elections. Who gives a damn about elections? People travel to these countries in their hundreds to monitor elections but we do not appear to monitor these thugs and what happens to the millions given in aid. We all know the history of Africa and what the leaders of these countries have done. They have become multibillionaires and nobody monitored them. Was that because we were viewed as colonialists? That is nonsense. We should monitor them. We should use every device possible to ensure our aid gets to where it is needed because, as Senator O'Rourke and others have said, people have tried so hard and shown that they care.

I repeat for the umpteenth time that the best thing Ireland can do is use what we use mostly at football matches and in pubs — our voices. Our politicians should use their voices at the top table. Money is not an issue. There is plenty around. The issue is the way it is spent and who will be held accountable. A voice at the top table putting pressure on the European Union and the international community at large to ensure the boys on the ground, be they the Indonesian army or the Sri Lankans stopping aid going to the Tamil Tigers, will not come to light unless there are concerned people watching on the ground. The monitoring aspect is vitally important.

Senator Norris is right. Governments are shamed. All members know this, although they will not admit it. When governments get a kick in the arse from the public, they respond. That is not a bad thing because it shows we are all liable to this. On this occasion people power forced governments to respond which is marvellous because I hope, in turn, they will respect the great commitment of people, not just in Ireland. I agree with previous speakers. The Irish Government did respond. It grasped the enormity of the tragedy and the mood of the people. That is an important point.

Deputy Mooney raised a point about Aceh. We are in Aceh. There is not a huge medical problem there. I am not saying the poor child to whom he referred who suffered badly should not have been looked after but, unfortunately, there is a total lack of co-ordination in Aceh. We could be working in Clontarf when the real problem is in Dún Laoghaire. We do not have the authority to set up in Dún Laoghaire, particularly when we are being monitored, to return to that word, by a group like the Indonesians. The Deputy asked us why we were not there. We are there but, as I keep saying, we are not miracle workers. We are a small, determined group. We care but there is a strict limit to what we can achieve.

Chairman

Would Ms Carmel Dunne like to make a brief comment? She is secretary general of the Irish Red Cross.

Ms Carmel Dunne

I agree with Mr. Justin Kilcullen on the need to be cautious about the militarisation of aid by bringing in a rapid response force. There is a blurring of lines between the military and aid workers which has put people's lives at risk. Therefore, we must be very careful when considering sending in a rapid response force.

On the question of accountability, we have received a great deal of money from the public for which we have to be accountable. We are all responsible for it and the way it is being spent but the Government has an opportunity to address this matter when examining the issue of charities operating in Ireland. Anybody can set up a charity as there is no legislation in place governing the matter. Work has been done for years with different charities in trying to move forward on the issue on which there is a White Paper but it is time legislation was introduced to allow us all examine the way we are spending our money.

We have people working in Banda Aceh. In the first few days they provided food for 30,000 people. They are now involved in providing housing for about 140,000. We are active in areas but there are many problems in the region.

Chairman

I thank everybody for attending the meeting. The discussion has been particularly valuable to the committee. I have noted many of the points made. We will follow up on them. Many of the issues raised are familiar to us because we have discussed them with the representatives previously. This was an extraordinary event and the way we and the international organisations dealt with the disaster is particularly important. We would be happy to discuss the matter again after a period of time when the situation has settled a little more. I thank the representatives for staying so long with us and members for their contributions. We will go into private session for a short time.

The joint committee went into private session at 4.25 p.m. and adjourned at 4.40 p.m. sine die.