I will get the ball rolling, in no particular order. The members have put a lot of thought into this matter, which is most welcome. It is clear how engaged in a very deep way people in this room are which is very positive from our point of view, given the effort we have put in. We now realise members are thinking of this in a meaningful way. I am sure their submission will be very insightful for the process. I thank members for that.
There were so many questions and comments I am left trying to come up with a way of summarising, as best I can. My colleagues will add to this and, I hope, pick up the bits I do not. In my initial comments I spoke about the need for policy coherence and we talked about that. This issue has come up in regard to trade and the emphasis on other governmental drives, for example, climate change. We need to have a whole-governmental approach and we need to set up a structure that will represent that so that we can ensure that any policy across a myriad of Departments will help in some way rather than hinder. That was flagged in the original White Paper but it has not yet gone so far. We hope it will be developed.
I refer to aid effectiveness, in very broad terms. I had the pleasure, along with the Chairman, Mr. Zomer and others, to represent Ireland at the Busan aid effectiveness meeting. That agenda is not about donors but about developing country governments and their responsibilities. It is also about civil society which, thankfully, has a space there. It is these groups working together, challenging each other and holding each other to account to ensure there is delivery and that the delivery does what it is meant to do. It was great to hear about the experiences of parliamentarians and it was welcome that both Government and Opposition were involved, that those kinds of developments are happening and that members get to hear both sides.
What we, as a sector, constantly speak to - it was mentioned heavily in the paper and in the opening comments - is the strengthening of civil society and of local organisations. This can be very substantial and in-depth and can show great policy understanding and knowledge regarding holding governments to account. Civil society or NGOs on their own will not solve global poverty. We never said we would; nor should we be arrogant enough to think we could. It will be solved in a number of ways. Trade is a very important part of that as are responsible governments being held to account by their own people on delivering essential services, education and health care and, in this part of the world, opening up opportunities. We know how unfair and difficult current trade arrangements are for developing countries. We have lobbied very hard and successfully in regard to the economic partnership agreements between Europe and, for example, the east Africa region. Those agreements have now been suspended because they were considered to be very unfair. However, the organisations that really came in behind that campaign were civil society groups in east Africa - hundreds of them. Eventually, they put pressure on their own parliamentarians, in Tanzania and the east Africa region, to say, hold on a minute, this is not acceptable, this is a bad deal.
The constant investment in civil society is essential, to be able to have that voice, that capacity to analyse, to develop policy and put pressure on. The Irish Aid programme has, thankfully, been very supportive of that, both through us and through the partners with which we work. A lot of us work almost exclusively through partners and local organisations which know better than we do what is needed. That must continue and develop.
Do we have a Rolls Royce version? I would not say that. We know we have a very good aid programme but the only way it will continue to be good is if we continue to put pressure on ourselves, innovate and hold ourselves to account. The oversight of this group and others is essential towards ensuring this happens. We welcome that and it should continue to be strengthened.
The issue of transparency and accountability is something in which we firmly believe. We hold governments to account; likewise the sector must be held to account. Mr. Zomer might speak better on behalf of the whole group - I represent one organisation and today I also represent Dóchas. I am conscious of that so perhaps it might be better for Mr. Zomer to comment on it. We have certainly put systems in place, codes of corporate governance, transparency codes and so on, to ensure that everybody can analyse and see clearly what we are doing, the impact it is having, the expenditure, as mentioned, and so on. We must continue to be better at that as a sector.
We also need to engage better with the public. I believe it was Deputy Ó Fearghail who mentioned the necessity to get the public beyond thinking about emergencies. That is where the media are and the truth is we must be there. We have to save lives, that is our duty and part of the imperative, but it is only one part of it. The long-term development and policy work we do is what makes the real change. It will not necessarily prevent an emergency from happening but will ensure that a community and a country are much better equipped to deal with it when it does.
I will not dominate the discussion - it would be fair to share with my colleagues.
