Skip to main content
Normal View

JOINT COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS debate -
Wednesday, 13 Feb 2008

Irish Aid Annual Report 2006: Discussion with Minister of State at Department of Foreign Affairs.

Item No. 2 on the agenda is Irish Aid's annual report for 2006. It is with great pleasure that I welcome a former member of the joint committee, the Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs with special responsibility for overseas development, Deputy Michael Kitt. On behalf of the committee, I congratulate him on his well deserved appointment. As a member of the previous committee and a Member of the 22nd Seanad, he was particularly committed to overseas development and served admirably as Chairman of the Sub-Committee on Development Co-operation for the duration of the last Parliament. I have no doubt that he will give outstanding service in his new capacity as Minister of State.

I also welcome Mr. Ronan Murphy, Mr. Brendan Rogers and their colleagues from Irish Aid. The Minister of State will make a presentation on the Irish Aid annual report for 2006 which has been circulated to members. He will also give an outline of activities during 2007 and discuss the Irish Aid work programme for 2008. We will then take questions from members. The year 2006 was something of a watershed, in that it saw publication of the White Paper on Irish aid. As I have said repeatedly and has been said at this committee, this is an excellent paper and I congratulate the staff concerned and the Minister of State on the work done in preparing it. I am sure he will update the committee on the progress made in implementing some of the many key recommendations made in the report.

We should start by congratulating the Minister of State and Irish Aid on the progress achieved to date in moving towards the key UN target of spending 0.7% of GNP on aid by 2012. The Minister of State might update us on where we are now and outline the current spending level. I also ask him to update the committee on the role of the recently formed interdepartmental committee on Irish aid which has been discussed at a number of previous meetings of the committee and members have expressed an interest in its work.

I now invite the Minister of State to give his address.

I thank the Chairman and members for inviting me to address the joint committee. I am grateful for this opportunity to present an overview of the work and achievements of Irish Aid in the last two years and our plans for 2008.

I am fortunate to have taken on this role at an exciting time as the programme expands to reach the UN target of spending 0.7% of GNP on overseas development assistance by 2012. The Government has allocated a total of €914 million to overseas development aid this year, representing 0.54% of GNP, an increase of €100 million on spending in 2006. The OECD recently ranked Ireland as the sixth most generous donor country in per capita terms in the world and this year’s allocation helps cement our leading position.

Our number one priority remains the fight against global poverty and exclusion. I would like to emphasise my personal commitment to that objective and to Ireland's contribution towards reaching the millennium development goals in the years ahead. These goals will continue to inform all Irish Aid plans and activities. The White Paper on Irish aid published in 2006 reiterated the principles and objectives of the programme and provides a clear road map at a time of significant change. In recent years Irish Aid has continued to focus its development effort on the poorest countries in the world, many of which are in sub-Saharan Africa. The designation of Malawi as our ninth programme country in the White Paper reinforced this Africa and poverty focus. It is one of the poorest countries in the world, ranked 166 out of 177 on the United Nation's human development Index. An embassy was opened in Lilongwe last year and I hope to see for myself the progress made in planning Irish Aid support for poverty reduction when I visit there in June.

We have made significant progress in the past two years with a number of new initiatives announced in the White Paper. These include the establishment of the hunger task force, the rapid response initiative, an interdepartmental committee on development and the opening of a volunteering and information centre in Dublin. I would like to give the committee a brief update on these initiatives and explain how they allow Irish Aid to respond in a more dynamic way to the needs of developing countries and promote public ownership of the programme.

The hunger task force brings together Irish and international experts to make concrete recommendations on improving food security and protecting rural livelihoods. It has met on a number of occasions under the chairmanship of the former Minister for Agriculture and Food, Mr. Joe Walsh, and will travel to Malawi at the end of this month. It is expected to report by the middle of the year on contributing to halving world hunger and poverty levels by 2015. Irish Aid will immediately act on these findings.

The rapid response initiative launched last year has improved Ireland's capacity to respond in a more cohesive way to sudden emergencies. Essential humanitarian supplies are now pre-positioned in forward bases in Europe and Africa. A rapid response corps with over 50 Irish experts recruited last year is ready to be deployed at short notice to assist our partner agencies. A public appeal for a further 20 experts will be launched in the coming days. The corps is backed up with advance funding for key partners such as the United Nations, the International Red Cross and non-governmental organisations to allow them the flexibility to scale up their response capabilities at short notice. We will pay particular attention to the situation in Sudan, Chad and the Central African Republic in the coming months. The crisis in Darfur continues to destabilise the region. We intend to step up our humanitarian response this year in tandem with our contribution to the EU peacekeeping mission to Chad. As well as our work overseas, we will work to improve coherence in Government policy at home on development issues.

The interdepartmental committee on development, another key recommendation made in the White Paper, was established last year and I will chair its fourth meeting shortly. A particular focus will be skills transfer from Ireland for development purposes and promoting stronger Irish representation within staffing structures of multilateral organisations, including the UN. It is important also to build a sense of public ownership of the Irish Aid programme as expenditure reaches unprecedented levels.

The opening of the Irish Aid volunteering and information centre on O'Connell Street in Dublin last month fulfilled another White Paper commitment. The centre will help the public understand why and how public funds are being used for development and provide ideas on how to become personally involved. Some 50 schools groups are booked to visit the centre before July and over 45 public events relating to development are planned this year. Plans are also under way for Irish Aid to mark Africa Day on 25 May. I invite the Chairman and members of the committee to visit the centre and see this exciting new venue.

HIV/AIDS has a particularly devastating impact on the poorest and most vulnerable people in developing countries. Irish Aid now spends €100 million each year on prevention strategies and better access to treatment for this and other communicable diseases. We dedicate a greater proportion of our budget to fighting HIV and AIDS than any other European country.

Between 2002 and 2007 Irish Aid contributed €80 million to the global fund for AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria. This support allowed over 700,000 men, women and children access to treatment and extended prevention and care services to many more.

Education is also key to the fight against poverty and exclusion. Irish Aid focuses on primary education where the needs are greatest. In Ethiopia, for example, we supported the training of 30,000 primary school teachers and the construction of 145 primary schools in 2006. Enrolment in primary schools in Lesotho has increased from 57% in 1990 to over 80% last year, again with Irish Aid assistance.

I cite these examples to give members an idea of how Irish funding is making a tangible difference to the lives of some of the world's poorest people. The populations of countries that have recently experienced conflict and instability are especially vulnerable. In 2006, the Government established a special budget for Sierra Leone and Liberia in recognition of their particular needs following years of civil conflict.

Our support to these and other fragile states will be stepped up this year. Other priority areas confirmed in the White Paper include the environment, gender and governance. We have a particular interest in promoting effective responses to climate change in developing countries and in gender equality, given its importance in development and human rights terms. Good governance and the fight against corruption are key to sustainable development and Irish Aid will finalise a strategy to guide its work in this area shortly.

We are also increasing our support to initiatives to build the capacity of the private sector in developing countries through our Traidlinks initiative and our funding for the Fairtrade network. Irish Aid has continued to work closely with non-governmental organisations, multilateral institutions and funds and governments in our partner countries over the past two years to achieve our objectives.

Some of Ireland's largest overseas development NGOs, including Concern, Goal, the Irish Red Cross, Oxfam, Trócaire, Self-Help International and others, will receive over €100 million from the Government this year in support of their efforts to combat poverty and suffering. We will also provide €20 million this year in support of the development work of Irish missionaries.

The United Nations and European Union have a crucial role in a co-ordinated international response to the complex challenges of global poverty. Our funding to the UN is channelled mainly to the UN Development Programme, UNICEF and the High Commissioner for Refugees. We are also at the forefront of UN reform and Ireland is currently co-chairing a UN working group on system-wide coherence. The group is working to make practical changes that will improve the effectiveness of UN operations, including its development agencies.

The European Union is the largest donor of development assistance in the world, providing almost €50 billion to more than 150 countries and territories in 2006. Ireland's contribution to the European Development Fund will amount to approximately €206 million between 2008 and 2013. We will also continue our support for the EU aid for trade initiative, which builds the capacity of poorer countries to participate in the international trading system.

In ongoing negotiations between the EU and Africa, Caribbean and Pacific countries on economic partnership agreements, Ireland has insisted on the needs of least-developed countries. Our position is that these agreements should be genuine development instruments and that the partner countries should not be materially worse off as a result of the negotiations.

Partnership remains a core principle for Irish Aid. I am convinced development efforts need to be driven and owned by local people and governments if they are to be successful in the long run. There are of course obstacles. Many of the countries with which we work have weak systems of governance and in some developing countries corruption and abuse of power are of particular concern. Corruption most affects those who are already vulnerable and impoverished. Irish Aid is responding directly. We are building the capacity of public institutions to fight corruption and also helping citizens to hold governments to account. This includes assistance for parliamentary oversight and support to bodies such as auditors general and government inspectorates. We also help to strengthen judicial systems and support civil society and the development of independent media in order that people are aware of their rights and can insist on them. In Uganda, for example, we are supporting reform of the justice system. In Ethiopia we are funding improvements to the audit functions within the government, while in Zambia we are contributing to the work of a special task force on corruption. Irish Aid funds Transparency International in its work to reduce tolerance of corruption worldwide. We are also working actively with the World Bank and United Nations agencies to agree strategies in this area.

It is important that the highest levels of accountability and public confidence are maintained for overseas development spending. Our programmes are regularly and intensively audited by independent audit firms, Irish Aid's evaluation and audit unit and the independent audit committee of the Department. Additional professional staff have been recruited by Irish Aid for this area in the past two years and our programmes and projects are routinely evaluated to ensure lessons are learned and that value for money is maximised.

We have an intense work programme ahead of us this year. Preparations are under way for the development assistance committee of the OECD peer review of Irish Aid which takes place next year. Ireland will also participate actively in international efforts to improve aid effectiveness, including at the OECD high level forum which will take place in Accra, Ghana, in September.

This year the decentralisation of the Irish Aid headquarters to Limerick is scheduled to take place. A major management review of the programme is under way to ensure we continue to have sufficient human resources with appropriate skills available to plan, manage and monitor the programme. The results of the review are likely to be ready by this spring.

During this period of significant change I am conscious of the need for regular dialogue with members of the Oireachtas and this committee, in particular. I know that in recent years a number of Deputies will have visited our programme countries and I am more than happy to facilitate such visits. It is important that the committee experience at first-hand our work in programme countries, the issues faced and the impacts we are having. I hope this co-operation between my Department and the committee will continue and intensify. While the rapid expansion of the programme has its challenges, I am confident that we will continue to deliver high quality results.

I have seen the difference we are making to the lives of the poorest of the poor during recent visits to Mozambique, Tanzania and South Africa accompanying the Taoiseach. Allow me to cite a number of examples of progress made. Irish Aid's partnership with the Government of Mozambique and the Clinton Foundation enabled over 44,000 people access to anti-retroviral drugs to combat HIV and AIDS by the end of 2006. Irish Aid funded projects in Uganda have contributed to a reduction in the HIV infection rate from over 30% of the adult population to approximately 6% currently. In Zambia, Ireland has financed a programme of well and borehole drilling in the northern province that now provides a sustainable source of fresh clean water for over 113,000 people. As increased resources are allocated to the programme in the coming years, we will work as hard as ever to ensure the focus on results continues. We have a duty to the taxpayer to ensure this is the case but also to people in developing countries for whom development assistance programmes such as ours can literally be a lifeline to a better future.

I hope I have addressed, at least in broad terms, the work of Irish Aid in recent years, the impacts and our immediate plans and priorities. I am happy to take questions.

I thank the Minister of State for an excellent report — there is a great deal of work under way — and outline of the possibilities for 2008. The progress achieved to date, in the view of the committee, has been excellent. We have visited many projects and seen the valuable work done. There were concerns about the extra funding allocated and whether Irish Aid could organise to make use of it. From what the Minister of State has told us, it is obvious work in this regard is well under way. I congratulate the Minister of State and staff on getting such a vigorous programme up and running. There will be plenty of room for discussion and improvement. There was a concern expressed by many as the extra funds were made available about the capacity of our overseas aid service to handle them. A couple of things come to mind. In our work with Ethiopia the suggestion has come up that we might bring a mixed group of parliamentarians from the two sides there to visit us here to have a session on the operation of our kind of democracy and how that might fit in with theirs. They are establishing an opposition. We spoke to some of the opposition people in the prison. That is all behind us now thankfully. That is something with which the Minister of State might be able to assist us. It would be very valuable because the members had very useful and valuable meetings with our friends in Ethiopia.

On the corruption issue, I am glad to see we are talking to the World Bank as we have been pushing for some time the need for the banks to participate in what is happening. The end of the line for money is in big banks and they are not really the big banks in Ireland but elsewhere. We will not go into which countries have them. Some of the banks are very high on the list of donations and they come up very high on Transparency International's list of clean countries. That may be so, but banks in those clean countries may not be quite so clean. That area needs to be developed in a very practical way and I am delighted to see the Minister of State emphasising it because that too will give more solace to our taxpayers.

We have in the past asked Irish Aid to support Bethlehem University. We saw the work there and how essential it was. We would certainly like to see that continue in the current circumstances and with the extra funds. I am glad the Minister of State is happy to facilitate visits from Members to the work being carried out on the ground.

The Minister of State in his remarks mentioned something I raised last week. It refers to auditing generally. The Minister of State mentioned the work of the Irish Aid audit unit and the Department audit unit and said that lessons had been learnt and value for money was being maximised. I refer to the value for money review completed by Irish Aid on the support for tsunami-affected countries, which was released last year. In the report, Irish Aid recommended that it should, in addition to asking for reports on individual projects, also request external evaluations of the overall programmes to which it contributes. What really caught my eye was how specific their recommendations were. They asked should Irish Aid consider making all grants of €300,000 and above conditional on such an external programme evaluation being undertaken and submitted. The easiest way of implementing this recommendation would be for Irish Aid as part of its normal funding agreement to require grant recipients to budget for an outside evaluation at the time of preparing the initial proposal and budget. These recommendations do not come from a different entity; they come from the people who put the report together. By making such a stark recommendation, the underlying message is that the organisation has a concern that the reporting requirements that exist are not sufficient. That 30% to 40% of the money raised in Indonesia in the aftermath of the tsunami was lost to corruption also melds with the message that recommendation is sending. The departmental officials might also comment on this but the Minister of State must respond. It is all very well saying lessons have been learned and value for money is maximised, but is it proposed to take the step of requiring additional reporting on these projects?

East Timor is one of our programme countries. Is the Department in communication with the members of Irish of Aid engaged in projects there? East Timor is going through massive turmoil. Can the Minister of State tell us what is the situation on the ground?

I thank the Minister of State and his officials for their report. Much progress has been made in reaching our spending target of 0.7% of GNP. Irish Aid finance includes assistance for parliamentary oversight and support to bodies such auditors general and government inspectorates. I am particularly interested in how we combat corruption and ensure recipient countries are adhering to proper audit and governance procedures. Will the Minister of State expand on how that works on the ground because we and the public want to be sure that as much of the money we give as possible gets to the people who need it?

I join in congratulating Deputy Michael Kitt on his appointment. I agree also that his contribution to this committee and the Sub-Committee on Development Co-operation was immense and that his appointment is a good one. What is important is that he has impressed people other than me. He has obviously impressed those who take such decisions.

I want to make a few points which relate to the presentation by the Minister of State. He referred to the White Paper. I understand from a reply to one of my foreign affairs questions that the Government will shortly be in a position to ratify the United Nations Convention against Corruption on the basis that the two Bills required, in which the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform is the lead Department, are now likely to be ready in this session. The Minister of State might confirm that is the position. In regard to the discussion on corruption, the credibility of a government speaking about corruption is surely affected by whether it has ratified the UN convention. I welcome that it can be ratified shortly.

At a general level, it is very important to be careful in a discussion on corruption. One needs to be specific about where one's concern is expressed. If one is saying, as some spokespersons do, that one should not deal with countries until they have a model of governance and administration which shows no scintilla of corruption, one's aid programme would very quickly grind to a halt. The second area of concern is whether the mechanisms by which the country receives international aid are corrupt. The third relates to the amounts of money one allocates to oneself from one's own accountable system through Irish Aid. These three levels require an entirely different analysis and strategy. I will speak plainly. People who make blunt statements about corruption may have an impact they do not want in terms of creating or amplifying a concern among the public that is not apparent. I am not making this case. I ran a campaign to have the United Nations convention ratified. NGOs have done the same. We will all welcome its ratification. However, it is important to keep a sense of balance.

I am concerned about an entirely different aspect of the entire structure of development, development education and development aid, namely, the imbalance appearing between what one might call administrative, bureaucratic and accountancy experts within the entire set of development practices. In the history of development studies, issues arise regarding the most appropriate mechanisms for economic and technology transfer, the most appropriate relationship between a donor country and a receiving country in regard to human rights, the relationships between short-term food insecurity and scarcity and long-term development and issues of education, participation and gender equality. Every one of these areas is more important than providing an international industry for forms of accountancy that simply do not address development tasks.

I have visited many countries, not just those where there are Irish programmes but many where there are European programmes. My concern relates more to the expansion of such bureaucracy as would add yet another additional distraction and displacement of attention and concern from the genuine task. In terms of identifying genuine tasks in the report and the Minister of State's speech, there is a need for research and development, for good theoretical work. I point to the work being carried out in the Hammarskjold Institute in regard to governance.

The Minister of State referred to the World Bank. The World Bank's approach to good governance is not accepted by the majority of serious academics. It is regarded as limited, narrow, distorted and not viable in producing what one might call good research. If members want to test my opinions — I will not delay them today because this is not an academic meeting — they can look at any of the literature from the Scandinavian institutes which have looked at this issue. Good governance is more than administration. It includes issues of participation, the formation of options, decision shaping as much as decision making and decision taking, which are all different dimensions. They are there in black and white in good literature. We should pay attention to these issues.

Turning to a few practical matters, we celebrate Africa Day in May. When Nelson Mandela was conferred with an honorary doctorate by the National University of Ireland, Galway, a seminar was organised at the suggestion of the South African people, among others, on the relationship of Europe with Africa. I would like to think that on that day, rather than having a presentation that is descriptive, we will have an examination or discussion of different economic and social models for Africa. Having looked at other African presentations during the years, it was unfortunate and amazing that Africa was presented not only as if somebody had discovered the Nile which was there for a long time before somebody claimed it but as if it were a continent with no history. We need a report on the progress of the world millennium development goals. It is one thing to mention these goals and another to hear a presentation on the facts, such as that funding by donor countries to the HIV project in Africa falls far short of what is necessary. I welcome the references to Malawi and other countries.

The Chairman knows the relationship between the interdepartmental committee on development and this committee has not been clarified. Will that committee report to this one? If we are to give lectures globally on transparency we might as well examine our own business. I thought the interdepartmental committee would ensure there were no contradictions between what we do in respect of trade or the environment, and aid, and so on. I would be deeply concerned if the interdepartmental committee were to decide on these matters. It is important that Irish Aid be the lead unit and that it report to this committee.

The Minister of State referred in a positive way to economic partnership agreements and his Department's insistence on the needs of least developed countries when he said "Our position is that these agreements should be genuine development instruments and that the partner countries should not be materially worse off as a result of the negotiations". Could he substantiate that by saying what revisions were made to the proposals from the Commission? The best way to test that empirically is to examine the implication of the WTO suggestions in respect of the countries involved to see what difference the Irish revision made. It has been suggested to us that some of what has been proposed in the economic partnership agreements is as bad as, or worse than, what had been previously tried. I refer to substance, process and implications, for example, the impact of climate change on herding communities in Africa arises frequently. These are practical issues. Could we develop a scheme for the further assistance of the replacement of herds lost because of drought? Some NGOs are already doing this. It would be worth considering this. I strongly support the Minister of State's work but there are areas about which more information should be made available to us.

I also welcome the Minister of State and thank him for his fine address and wish him well in his new position. I spent the month of January in South Africa and visited many of the townships where I spoke to NGOs and Irish missionaries. I also had a long chat with people working on Niall Mellon's programme. The people I met raised forcibly all the points aired here this morning, for example, how to fight corruption. I compliment the Government on the significant amount of money being spent in these countries but it does not get to the programmes fast enough. It is locked up somewhere or wasted. The Minister of State said "It is important to build a sense of public ownership of the Irish Aid programme as expenditure reaches unprecedented levels". Will he comment on that? He is convinced that development efforts need to be driven and owned by local people. That is true as many people made the same comment to me during my visit. We need to find Irish people to monitor how the money is being spent. Is this happening?

I support Deputy Higgins in his contention that we should proceed with implementing the United Nations convention on corruption. We should be a party to that convention as it is a very important cornerstone of setting a principle to deal with aid issues. It was stated in the White Paper that the overarching objective of our aid programme is poverty reduction.

Let me comment on one or two areas in particular countries, about which concerns were expressed. In a reference to dealing with corruption, the Minister of State said that Irish Aid is responding directly by building the capacity of public institutions to fight corruption, including assistance for parliamentary oversight and support to bodies, such as auditors general and government inspectorates. I think I am right in saying that over €30 million in Irish aid would have gone to Uganda. The President of Uganda is one of the most corrupt rulers in Africa. The Minister of State referred in his speech to support for reform of the justice system. One of the issues in Uganda is that they had more prisoners than the prison system could cope with and there were inadequate supports. Could we be told precisely what has been implemented by the Ugandan Government of the third party oversight which was agreed as part of the aid programme? What assurances can the Minister of State give the committee and the general public that part of the €30 million——

It was €44 million.

Perhaps €44 million is the figure this year. I am looking at the figure in the 2006 report. What part of that €44 million has not been siphoned off to benefit that regime as happened with other moneys that have gone to that country? That is a very serious question.

There is a pressing need for proper oversight and proper accounting. There is no point in taxpayers' money going to fund aid programmes in countries that badly need assistance if some of that money is being channelled off by the rulers for their own benefit. We have a responsibility to those people living in poverty, which we are trying to alleviate, to ensure that the money is used for the purposes for which it was intended.

There is a side issue. I would be interested to know what engagement the Minister of State or the Government had with the Ugandan Government on our concerns about human rights violations or the corrupt nature of the Government of Uganda. The odd thing is that if we ensure by oversight that our funding is properly used, all we might be doing is releasing other funding provided to the Ugandan Government for use by its members who are corrupt. I very much appreciate that this is not a straightforward or easy issue.

The Minister of State said that we are funding improvements to the audit functions in Ethiopia. Could he expand on that issue, as it is another Government in respect of which there are substantial allegations of corruption? What is the nature of the engagement we have had? What is the detail of the work being done with members of the Administration in Ethiopia to ensure there are proper audit functions? In that context, what third party oversight has been applied to the funding provided in 2006 or 2007? What oversight is envisaged for the funding to Uganda and Ethiopia in 2008?

I support the Minister of State's statement to the effect that we intend to continue working with, and receiving the assistance of, Transparency International. It is interesting that Ethiopia and Uganda, in the table of the top eight recipients of Irish international aid, score between 2.4 and 2.9 out of ten on Transparency International's global corruption index. They are regarded as two of the most corrupt countries. I do not want what I say to be misunderstood as I support our aid programme and believe it is very important. The Government deserves praise for increasing the contribution to 2.7%, to which we have been committed for a long time. However, when there is direct Government aid, it is important that there be oversight. The Minister for Finance has written to the committee to say we should ensure there is true value for money from aid programmes and that they benefit the people we intend to benefit.

I will raise another issue. Part of our programme is to highlight issues of human rights, something I much appreciate. In many of the countries in Africa for which we provide aid, either directly or through NGOs, human rights are more disregarded than observed. I am open to contradiction on this and I am interested in the Minister of State's view, but one of the sad realities of Africa to emerge from some of the work done is that, of all the countries across the continent, even allowing for their historical difficulties in the post-colonial era, only Botswana and South Africa are in an economically better condition in independence than they were in colonial days. Does the Minister of State have a comment to make on this?

I do not want to go into the final issue in great detail because we had a discussion last week on the topic. However, I have a particular concern about ministerial oversight. Can the Minister of State tell us what oversight there is to ensure NGOs which are given funding for the primary purpose of tackling poverty do not misuse it in partisan advocacy in cases of intractable political disputes? In particular, I refer to funding provided for certain NGOs which attended this committee last week such as Christian Aid and Trócaire. In the course of their work in the Palestinian territories they appear to be diverting a portion of Irish funding in support of a biased anti-Israeli narrative which is not in keeping with our objectives of seeking to bring about peace and reconciliation, nor with the objectives those groups articulate. I suggest to the Minister of State that it is inappropriate that aid funding is used for campaigning purposes by organisations which adopt a substantially less than objective view of the areas in which they work and instead engage in direct political action.

Trócaire has been supporting an anti-Israel boycott campaign, while Christian Aid adopts a highly biased approach to the whole conflict, as evidenced by a document handed out at the meeting last week. I am interested in knowing whether Irish Aid finance contributed to the publication of this document. That organisation is entitled to be critical of the Israelis, if it wishes, but the narrative of the document appears to evince a belief that the Middle East is devoid of suicide bombers and rocket attacks. I appreciate that people working in an area as individuals are entitled to adopt an individual view, with which I may disagree, but I do not believe they are entitled to use Irish Aid finance for publications promoting that view. I would like to know the Minister of State's view on that matter. I would also like to know how Irish Aid monitors funding to ensure it is not used for purposes for which it is not intended, and which might undermine the contribution this State can make towards truly advancing a worthwhile and viable peace process.

I am glad the Minister of State and his advisers have found the time to attend today. The appointment of the Minister of State was extremely appropriate. I had the pleasure of serving with him in Seanad Éireann and I know of the genuine commitment and passion which both he and his brother have for these issues. I found many of the earlier contributions interesting, including Deputy Shatter's. I was intrigued by his implicit call for a return to empire, which is something that should be examined closely by this committee.

I was merely citing a fact in the context of the economic work being done. I was not suggesting anyone should again colonise anybody. Senator Norris can never resist the opportunity to misrepresent something I said. It is becoming something of a political addiction on the Senator's part.

I am following in the glorious tradition of Deputy Shatter, who has made an entire political career out of that approach, and today's contribution was a remarkable instance of it. I believe it is an important issue and I deprecate mean-minded attempts to use this committee to stifle the expression of a viewpoint by raising questions concerning the funding of organisations which are extremely reputable. I was present at the meeting Christian Aid attended and its spokespersons condemned suicide bombings, which Deputy Shatter heard.

I was referring to the report it published.

Let us not have any more of that nonsense. The report was a fine report and was balanced. I have got to know the part of the world to which it refers quite well over the past 35 years and have actually visited the area with Christian Aid. I strongly urge the Minister of State to continue to provide funding.

Deputy Shatter raises relevant questions in regard to the prudent management of Irish Aid. There must be a balance and one must listen to the voices of both Deputy Shatter and Deputy Higgins who has wide experience in this issue. There is no doubt about the regimes in Uganda and Ethiopia. Some of the countries to which we have referred have a very large prison population, which gives rise to human rights issues, in circumstances where the infrastructure is so depleted that they are incapable of providing prisoners with what international authorities, including the WHO, regard as the minimum required subsistence nourishment. Prisoners must be fed, if it is possible at all, from outside and that indicts all of us. It is a very real human rights issue.

It is very difficult to deal with issues such as that arising in Darfur and the Irish Government is trying to take an honourable stand. I very much welcome the action of Steven Spielberg in removing himself from the advisory committee on the Beijing Olympic Games because of the situation in Darfur. Such a public stance, taken by an international celebrity, is very important and must be put in the context of attempts by the British Olympic committee to stifle comment by any of their athletes, which is very regrettable. Can the Minister of State comment on that?

I very much welcome the increasing percentage of GNP we now devote to this area. However, our position is becoming weaker all the time because we have the attitude that by making aid available we can gain leverage with some of these regimes, many of which are very corrupt. It is being undermined consistently and in a massive way by the colonialist and imperialist adventures of the People's Republic of China. That country is in the market with much more money than we have and a huge appetite for the natural resources of the continent of Africa. It has no qualms whatever about dealing directly with tyrants and dictators, handing over enormous sums of money in exchange for the raw materials it needs for its expanding economy. This greatly reduces our leverage because these unrepresentative governments can say, "We do not need you. We have cobalt. We have diamonds. We will flog them to the Chinese." This is a serious political problem and I ask the Minister of State to comment.

The situation in East Timor was first raised by Deputy Deasy and it is very worrying. We have had José Ramos-Horta in Dublin on numerous occasions. He has had meetings with this committee and he worked very closely over the years with Tom Hyland. Will the Minister of State indicate the degree of contact with Mr. Hyland? I had a couple of meetings with him after Christmas when he was here. Does he have any official standing? Is Ireland still in contact with him? The legitimate government of Horta and Xanana Guzmao deserves as much international and visible support as possible because there are discordant, disgruntled elements from Fretilin and the rest of them. We need to show solidarity.

I also welcome the opening of the information centre in O'Connell Street. I am being slightly parochial because it is just around the corner from where I live. It is quite striking. Just last night I was passing it and saw a very large video display which is eye-catching. People are drawn towards these issues by virtue of that video display.

I want to return to one of my various obsessions which is population. The enormous explosion in population is one of the issues that underlies a great deal of the tensions and the struggle for resources such as minerals or basic resources such as water. It has an impact on health and on human rights. I also commend the Government for its continued support of the UNFPA and its Irish representative group.

I draw the Minister of State's attention to the existence within the Oireachtas of the all-party interest group on sexual reproductive health rights, population and development. This is a key area, in particular the question of population and its links to development and health. Very often they are ignored and undermined. I welcome the support of the Government. Irish Aid's health policy mentions universal access to sexual and reproductive health and rights. This is very significant and very important, particularly in the case of countries retreating from these points. I ask the Minister of State to consider attending one of the meetings of this all-party Oireachtas group, particularly with regard to the population issues, the right to reproductive and sexual health and rights and the question of maternal and infant mortality in these countries.

I also refer to the squalid and horrible practice of female genital mutilation that continues in these countries and the impact this should have on issues of human rights and asylum. It is not a simple black and white question. We cannot undertake to receive as asylum-seekers every person who finds themselves in this situation.

I hope I did not take up too much time but as it is now only 9.35 a.m. we have plenty of time left before lunch.

We know what to do with the clocks for the next meeting.

I congratulate the Minister of State. When I heard the announcement I was very pleased because he will do a very good job. As a member of the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs on which I served previously, I know he has the compassion, the insight and the experience to be very successful in the job.

I share the concerns expressed by many other members about whether the vast amounts of money now being expended are being put to the best use. This issue has been raised previously and we have received general answers but we have not been given specific answers that would satisfy the committee. We will return to this subject on a number of occasions during the life of the committee.

Irish people are extremely generous when it comes to overseas development aid. There is absolutely no resistance to moving up to 0.7% of GNP and setting a headline for many other countries, as very few have reached that target. The Irish people were generous in the past when the main deliverers of aid overseas were the churches. When the responsibility was transferred in recent years to NGOs and to agencies of Government, the support and generosity of the Irish people has been maintained. However, people would not be quite so generous if they thought there was misappropriation of funds and this is the perception now. It is hard to put one's finger on it but if one talks to people involved in NGOs or to those who have lived in certain African countries for a while, it tends to come up in conversation. Nobody can produce what could be termed proof, but at the same time there is a widespread concern among people with experience that the aid which is being provided by Ireland is not always going to where it was intended. There is an issue of corruption which comes up frequently. It would be a pity if support for the programmes was undermined by a suspicion that there was widespread corruption. There is an onus on the Minister of State and on this committee to allay any suspicions in this regard.

I suggest the committee request the Minister of State to provide a report on the audit issues to the sub-committee on overseas development aid chaired by Deputy Deasy. I suggest it breaks down into a number of areas, the first being an audit of NGOs. I understand groups like Trócaire and Concern which receive aid have their own internal audits as well as external audits. Both internal and external audits are provided to the Department and the Department is satisfied with the audits.

The issue of government-to-government aid is more difficult. The Department relies on internal audits by the financial authorities in the recipient countries and these audits are taken at face value. In countries that do their business properly, one can take and accept the audit reports. If it was in Ireland, the reports produced by the Comptroller and Auditor General would be recognised internationally as being absolutely kosher and fully acceptable. The same is not true of countries with a reputation for corruption. Anybody who will misappropriate funds will have no difficulty in doing the paperwork to support the misappropriation. This is an issue for the Government, especially when the sums of money being expended are so large. This year, Ireland will donate in aid more than €0.75 billion. This is a very big budget and this committee and the Irish people would want assurances that none of this money is being misappropriated.

I ask the Minister of State to accept the suggestion of reporting to Deputy Deasy's sub-committee. He might deal in the first instance with the NGOs and how they are audited, and the Department's level of satisfaction with their audits. He might then concentrate on the problem area of country-to-country aid and the system of audits in place.

A second area to be dealt with is the issue of value for money. Even though there is no corruption associated with the NGOs, at least not that I have ever heard of, nor associated with the aid they provide, there is still an issue of waste. Nobody wants to see taxpayers' money wasted. I agree with previous speakers, particularly Senator Ormonde, who outlined the position in respect of her visit to South Africa. While there is no corruption or nothing untoward happening, it appears at times that the Irish taxpayer is not getting value for money in terms of the schools built, the number of children going through the school system, the upgrading of water schemes and sanitary services provided. We need a system that will ensure delivery is audited and matched against the resources provided.

I accept there is a degree of oversight and that the Department tries to monitor and quantify the return in physical terms for money spent. However, this approach is a little hit and miss and not as systematic as it might be. Perhaps the Minister of State will accept the suggestion that he report on the matter to the relevant sub-committee. Also, he will need to give us his view on how we, as a committee, could measure value for money and what the Department is prepared to do in terms of putting in place a mechanism by which value for money can be assessed. Were the Minister and his officials to be the initiators in putting together the type of report suggested — much of this work has been done piecemeal previously and would only involve the collection and collation of information — it would provide the sub-committee with an agenda to pursue the matter further. It would not require an initiative or the contracting of outside consultancy.

Having listened to members' views today and from speaking with them privately, I am aware that our overseas development aid programme is of primary concern. Can we stand over the audits? Is there corruption? If so, can it be eliminated particularly in respect of country to country aid? If there is no corruption — I do not believe there is — in the dispersal of funds by our major NGOs, could a mechanism be put in place that ensures value for money in this regard? In doing this, consideration should be given to the overheads of the NGOs and to what percentage of the funds allocated to them results in lifting people out of poverty in the partner countries? I do not wish to put it any stronger than this. Everyone knows what I am talking about; they have heard the stories. We would like if this information could be put on the table in a reasoned report following which the sub-committee could then report back to us.

I welcome my boss to the committee. Deputies Noonan, Shatter and other members raised the issue of corruption. Perhaps the Chairman will tell us if the committee has forwarded a letter to the Israeli ambassador asking him for proof of his allegation that our money is being misspent in Palestine?

We will deal with that matter later. The committee sent a letter on the matter to the Department of Foreign Affairs. It is a matter for the committee afterwards.

It is important that Trocaire be given an opportunity to reply to that allegation. I am not aware of any suggestion that a penny has been misspent by Trocaire which is a magnificent organisation. I must declare that a member of my family works for Trocaire.

On the issue in respect of those upon whom they rely for their information on human rights, namely, B'Tselem in Israel, it is important we do not damage people who are doing good work.

I am sure the ambassador has the proof to support his allegation. Like Deputy Noonan, I, too, welcome Stephen Spielberg's stance in respect of China. Though many believe the Beijing Olympics helped the human rights situation in China, this appears not to be the case. Like Senator Norris, I, too welcome the opening of the information centre. On opening night at the centre, a Mr. Tom Roche protested outside the door about the manner in which timber products are being imported into this country.Apparently, the timber used in the shuttering around our volunteer centre was illegally logged by Chinese companies in Papua New Guinea. It is Government policy that illegally sourced products are not used in Irish buildings. The Chinese Government is causing endless problems not only in Papua New Guinea but throughout Africa. I hope the Minister of State can ensure no illegally sourced materials are used in the construction of government buildings.

On the Minister of State's work in terms of overseas development and our expanding budget, I am sure all funds will be used effectively.

We have had a fairly broad discussion so far.

May I ask a brief question?

The Minister of State in his speech referred to the decentralisation this year of Irish Aid headquarters to Limerick. Like others, I have read many reports in respect of the difficulties of this occurring. Will the Minister of State outline the staffing position in the context of the number of people currently dealing with Irish aid issues? How many staff members have agreed to transfer to Limerick? Has a date been set for the transfer? Also, what will be the cost of the transfer? How many staff members are opting to remain in Dublin?

I would like to make a small practical point. The interdepartmental committee on development might be able to address an issue not previously addressed, namely, the hydrology programme operated by the department of engineering at the former UCG. This programme had a positive result in respect of China and Sri Lanka. The Department of Foreign Affairs continued to fund this programme despite its belief the programme should have been handled by the Department of Education and Science. The programme created an enormous amount of goodwill and had an immense practical result. Most of the people were involved in flood management in China. The first PhD award in this area was awarded by UCG, as it then was. In Sri Lanka, the main people involved in environmental management and its affects on water are graduates of this programme.

I would like if the project could be reconsidered given the dispute in respect of whether the Department of Foreign Affairs or the Department of Education and Science should handle the programme. This does not contradict my earlier position that the interdepartmental committee should initiate projects. Rather, I believe we should find a mechanism for considering how a good project might be assisted. Perhaps, the Department of Education and Science could pay for it in its Estimates.

I have a couple of points to make before the Minister of State replies. The committee will be happy to accept the invitation to visit the new volunteering and aid centre. The committee secretariat will arrange for such a visit in due course.

The committee welcomes the Minister of State's comments in respect of facilitating visits by it to view the work on the ground. They would be valuable at this time. Some of us have had an opportunity to view the exemplary work being done on the ground.

The committee has also discussed — Deputy Higgins raised this issue today — its inviting the interdepartmental committee on development to brief us on its work. Much has been said about oversight and corruption. It is an issue about which there is much concern. We visited Ethiopia and Uganda with officials from the Department of Foreign Affairs and saw at first hand the work being done by Irish Aid. We also saw the schools and water programmes funded by Irish Aid and accounted for by the ambassador or chargé d'affaires. We also visited Gulu in Uganda. We were glad that the Ugandan army was there because we could not have visited any of the local people without its assistance. We were out in the bush, where one could be murdered from a few yards away. The Minister of State knows all about this. We have to keep everything in balance. Irish Aid is not on its own in Uganda. It is being supported by the Department of Foreign Affairs which is doing its own checking.

I agree that the joint committee should ask the newly formed sub-committee on overseas aid to make clear its position on audits in Ethiopia and to obtain information in that regard. We will certainly do so. The sub-committee can take that on as one of its early tasks and report back to this committee.

Questions were also asked about whether valuable things were being done in Ethiopia. Some projects such as the Safety Nets programme are mentioned in the report on our visit to Africa. The Safety Nets programme has been developed on foot of the success of certain Irish Aid projects such as a water management initiative and a scheme focusing on community involvement in work. Approximately 500,000 people who would otherwise be starving are being fed through the programme. It has been suggested such evidence of progress should be shown to people in order that they can understand the value of the work being done by Irish non-governmental organisations, Irish Aid and Irish missionaries.

I invite the Minister of State to respond to the various issues raised.

I thank the Chairman and members of the committee for their comments and questions. The Chairman spoke about visits by parliamentarians to Ethiopia. The Department of Foreign Affairs is happy to facilitate such visits in any way it can.

Reference was made to the Bethlehem University project which Ireland has supported since 1987. It is one of our longest running projects and we are happy to support it. I repeat my invitation to the committee to visit the centre at the university. I am aware that Senators Norris and Daly and other members of the committee have seen it. It is well worth a visit.

Deputy Deasy asked about auditing. There are a number of internal and external audits. The HIV-AIDS programme is audited twice a year.

The Deputy also asked about moneys donated following the Asian tsunami of 2004. The findings of the value for money review of Irish Aid's support for tsunami relief were positive. There were some weaknesses in the international response, as the Deputy said. It was an exceptional occurrence. Obviously, not everything will go to plan when something on the scale of the Asian tsunami happens so suddenly. When the tsunami took place, there was a heartening response from non-governmental organisations and individuals who came forward to offer help. The recommendations made by the board of Irish Aid have been taken on board. While it might be a cliché to say so, we have learned a lesson from the sudden events of December 2004.

I remind the Minister of State of what everyone else has been saying for the last hour. A specific recommendation was made. From where did it come? Did Mr. Rogers or Mr. Murphy make it? It was recommended that an external programme evaluation should be undertaken and submitted when a grant of over €300,000 was being proposed. The same message was transmitted by Deputy Noonan. The report was prepared by Irish Aid, rather than GOAL, Trócaire or Christian Aid. This serious recommendation must have been based on some serious concerns, possibly the same concerns we have been discussing for the last hour and 20 minutes. The recommendation being made in respect of Irish Aid — that every grant should be subject to external evaluation — is specific. I would like to know from where it is coming.

We have internal and external consultants. We obtain views from private consultants also. I will let Mr. Rogers and Mr. Murphy deal with that matter later.

Deputy Deasy asked about East Timor where the situation is tense. The Department of Foreign Affairs is in daily contact with people there. As Mr. Rogers will be going there at the weekend, perhaps it would be best to allow him to speak on the matter. The Minister, Deputy Ahern, is expected to go there too, but that might change depending on the advice we receive. It seems that concerted and co-ordinated attacks were made on the lives of the President and Prime Minister of East Timor. We will keep in close contact on the issue. It is obvious that we are in East Timor, one of our programme countries, for the long haul. Recent events will not deter us from continuing our work there. The Minister is still planning to go there. I will ask Mr. Rogers who is also participating in the visit to update the committee on recent events.

Deputy Shatter asked about Irish Aid's support for political advocacy. We try to support non-governmental organisations, mostly through the multi-annual programme schemes. Projects supported under the schemes are subject to strict rules and criteria. There needs to be a focus on the alleviation of poverty. The main NGOs — GOAL, Trócaire, Christian Aid and Self Help — will be given €100 million in the next few years. I met representatives of Transparency International which has done good work to highlight problems in various countries when they attended meetings of this committee.

I was also asked about the decentralisation programme. The Department of Foreign Affairs already has 50 staff in an interim office in Limerick. Approximately 83% of the staff to be decentralised have been designated. Work on the new building is continuing. It has almost been finished. Irish Aid will transfer to the new premises in June this year, when the furniture has been provided and ICT fit-out completed. Work is in progress in that regard. The trade union IMPACT which represents specialists in the Department is involved in ongoing discussions with the Departments of Finance and Foreign Affairs. I hope the discussions will be brought to a successful conclusion at an early date.

It has been suggested Irish Aid officials who have accumulated detailed expertise during the years do not intend to relocate to Limerick. I do not refer to basic secretarial and backup staff. I do not know whether that suggestion is true. Will the Minister of State comment on the suggestion Irish Aid will lose most of its expertise when its operations are transferred to Limerick?

I reiterate that discussions are taking place between IMPACT which represents the officials in question and the Departments of Finance and Foreign Affairs.

Have any of the specialists opted to transfer?

It is obvious that I cannot intervene in the discussions between the union and the Departments. Some 55 officials will move on 14 June next as part of the first phase of the scheme. The remaining officials will move on 28 June.

At what staff level are the 55 officials in question employed? What precise functions do they perform in the context of Irish Aid?

I do not have a precise breakdown of the staff levels involved. Some 55 officials will move in June. That will bring the number to 60. Some staff will be transferred. The two dates——

The Minister of State can give us a note afterwards.

Yes. The transfers will take place on 14 and 28 June. I will send the committee a note on the matter.

I wish to answer the questions raised by Deputy Higgins. In 2007, Africa Day — 25 May — unfortunately fell on the day after the general election — the day of the count. I take the Deputy's point about having a seminar or some other method of celebration. As they say in Galway, we should have a mighty celebration anyway on 25 May and this year there will be no general election to distract us. The Deputy also raised the point of ratifying the convention, which other members also mentioned. The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform is working on that, so progress is being made. I will convey the Deputy's views to the Minister and will revert to him on that.

May I clarify that point? In answer, the Minister for Foreign Affairs — and I think the matter has been taken up with the Taoiseach — said the ratification depended on two Bills which will give us compliance. My understanding was that the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform is the lead Department and that both Bills will be completed. One could therefore anticipate ratification in the current year. I would welcome that.

I will certainly bring those views to the attention of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform who is dealing with that matter.

The Minister of State might send the committee a note on that.

I will. Deputy Higgins also raised the issue of the interdepartmental committee on development, which this committee has been discussing. I answered questions on this matter in the Dáil recently. The committee's role is to strengthen coherence in the Government's approach to development and it has an advisory role similar to that of the advisory board. However, it does not examine or make decisions on aid projects — that is done by Irish Aid. It is about coherence in developing policy and I appreciate the Deputy's points on that matter.

Senator Ormonde spoke about South Africa and I met her there. She makes a fair point about ownership and getting projects delivered to the people. That is happening on the ground in the countries I have visited. The Chairman said so himself, following what he saw there.

Senator Norris raised the issue of East Timor, which I have spoken about. Mr. Brendan Rogers will talk about it in due course.

We will have a debate in the Seanad tonight on the UN population fund and infant mortality. I will participate in that debate so I will raise those issues then.

Deputy Noonan raised the question of corruption and we are glad audits are taking place. In recent days, we have heard of the resignation of the prime minister of Tanzania and his cabinet. There is a completely new government in place there, which has been appointed by the president. While it may be unfortunate for the people there, it demonstrates that after inquiries or audits people have had to resign because of what has occurred. It is an example that where audits take place, the necessary oversight is working in those areas.

Senator Daly and Deputy O'Brien also raised the corruption issue and I have been calling for increased oversight on what we are doing — whether that is done by evaluations or audits. Towards the end of last year, parliamentarians from Lesotho came here to visit the office of the Ombudsman and to examine our Civil Service and Public Service Commission. They looked at the issues we are dealing with here. When we work with developing countries we have the same situation concerning their governmental systems, including judicial and auditing methods.

I will ask Mr. Brendan Rogers to discuss East Timor, while our Director-General, Mr. Ronan Murphy, will talk about the evaluation process. Mr. Rogers has lived and worked in Uganda so perhaps he will deal with the question raised concerning that country.

Deputy Deasy asked me to present his apologies to the committee as he must attend the House.

Mr. Ronan Murphy

Audit and evaluation go to the heart of everything we do in development work. If we cannot account for how the money is spent, we have a major problem. I believe we have robust audit and evaluation systems in place. It was suggested that, together with the head of the audit and evaluation unit, we come back to a sub-committee meeting and discuss this issue in greater depth on the basis of our report on what we do. There are some misunderstandings about this. Deputy Deasy referred to the tsunami report, but that was an independent external report. It was the first in a series of value for money reports that the Government stipulates must be made. We have acted on the recommendations made in that report. There are answers to the Deputy's questions. He suggests that when we meet again we go into greater detail with Mr. Finbar O'Brien, the head of audit and evaluation unit. We could arrange for the Deputy to meet the chair of the audit committee if he so wishes. We have a good story to tell on audit and evaluation.

Mr. Brendan Rogers

I lived and worked in Uganda. It is a difficult place. Most corruption, as far as we can see, happens in public procurement, namely, in big capital projects such as roads and bridges, rather than in funding through the social sectors. We are very clear, as Mr. Ronan Murphy stated, and we have auditors and accountants in our missions who have complete access to the books. We then bring in international firms, such as KPMG and PWC, who are based in those countries and they carry out an independent audit and evaluation.

The national auditors general tend to be very robust individuals and we work with them and with donors to look at all of the books of a particular government. Occasionally we take a tracking study, where we take a sum of money that was supposed to be spent on a school or a well and we track it right through the government system. The Government of Uganda has introduced a very novel system whereby when a local community gets money for its schools, it must be posted on a public noticeboard in the town. Local people can see it and go to the school to check if the money is there. The situation is still difficult but this is what is happening.

Uganda was a graveyard in 1987 after Mr. Obote. When I was there, it was the epicentre of the HIV epidemic. It was where HIV started and 35% of the populated had contracted it. Currently the incidence has been reduced to about 7% to 8%, which is an amazing achievement. When I lived there, 2 million children attended school, but now the figure is more than 6 million, thanks to money from the Irish public. These are very positive elements in the midst of the difficult stories. It is still very difficult but those 6 million children are the future of the country and they will make the demands on Government to give them democracy and transparency. It would not be the correct approach for us to abandon them.

I thank the Minister of State and his officials for attending. It was a very informative, progressive and interesting presentation. We all agree that a lot more needs to be done, but everybody can see objectively that many new developments are under way. The relationship between Irish Aid and the committee has been growing over a number of years and overseas aid is an issue in which the committee takes a keen interest. We echo the hopes of the Minister of State that this relationship will continue and intensify and we look forward to having the Minister of State and officials visit the committee on a regular basis over the coming years.

The Minister of State will be aware that in the lifetime of the previous Dáil we conducted a detailed examination of five of the nine programme countries and produced project reports on Ethiopia, Uganda, Timor-Leste, Vietnam and Mozambique. We will repeat this exercise with the remaining four programme countries in the very near future, starting with Malawi.

The Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Dermot Ahern, is due to travel to Timor-Leste next week. I hope the visit will be able to proceed. I would be very grateful if the Minister of State would convey to the Minister this committee's serious concern at events in that country. The attack on the President and Prime Minister by renegade troops was truly shocking and represented an inexcusable attack on a legitimately elected Government. This committee has been particularly supportive of Irish Aid's efforts in Timor-Leste in recent years and hopes the international force led by the Australian troops will bring order to the country quickly. I speak for all members in wishing President Ramos-Horta a speedy recovery.

The Minister of State outlined the funding commitments to our non-governmental organisations for 2008. I am sure they will join us in welcoming his pledge of €120 million in direct aid in the coming year to facilitate their efforts with the poorest of the world's poor. We are pleased, too, that €20 million is allocated to missionaries. The committee previously requested that this funding be increased because of the direct nature of their work.

I congratulate the Minister of State and his Department on the dynamic progress made in the Irish Aid programme in recent years. We will watch with great interest to see what progress is made. The committee looks forward to playing an active and co-operative role in the implementation of the overseas aid programme. I thank Mr. Murphy, Mr. Rogers and their staff for facilitating this discussion.

The joint committee went into private session at 12.40 p.m. and adjourned at 12.55 p.m. sine die.
Top
Share