Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 9 Jun 1982

Vol. 98 No. 3

Joint Committee on Co-operation with Developing Countries: Motion.

Mr. E. Ryan

I move.

(1) That Seanad Éireann concurs with Dáil Éireann in its Resolution communicated to Seanad Éireann on 2 June, 1982, that it is expedient that a Joint Committee of both houses of the Oireachtas (which shall be called the Joint Committee on Co-operation with Developing Countries be established consisting of 11 members of Dáil Éireann and 7 members of Seanad Éireann (none of whom shall be a member of the Government or a Minister of State) to examine:

such aspects of

(a) Ireland's relations with developing countries in the fields of development co-operation, and

(b) the Government's Official Development Assistance programme,

as the Joint Committee may select and to report thereon to both Houses of the Oireachtas.

(2) That provision be made for the appointment of substitutes to act for members of the Joint Committee who are unable to attend particular meetings.

(3) That the Joint Committee, previous to the commencement of business, shall elect one of its members to be Chairman, who shall have only one vote.

(4) That all questions in the Joint Committee shall be determined by a majority of votes of the members present and voting and in the event of there being an equality of votes the question shall be decided in the negative.

(5) That every report which the Joint Committee proposes to make shall, on adoption by the Joint Committee, be laid before both Houses of the Oireachtas forthwith, whereupon the Joint Committee shall be empowered to print and publish such report together with such related documents as it thinks fit.

(6) That 5 members of the Joint Committee shall form a quorum of whom at least 1 shall be a member of Dáil Éireann and at least 1 shall be a member of Seanad Éireann.

Mr. B. Ryan

I suppose it is because of our involvement with a particular Church that we have such an attachment to symbols and symbolism. We talk at great length about development and developing countries and this committee is obviously an admirable and noble idea. However, I would like to speak technically against the proposal because it will serve no purpose and do nothing because we are part of the wealthy bloc of powerful countries who express platitudes about development. In fact, there are no developing countries outside the Western bloc. Most of them are going rapidly backwards and it is a misnomer to describe them as developing. They are not developing; relatively speaking they are getting worse and in some cases, in absolute terms, are getting worse.

In addition, we talk about our concern for them. In fact, we are part of the western and northern bloc of powerful countries and our major exports to those countries are arms. If we were to live without the arms that the western world exports to these so-called developing countries, we would be more impoverished ourselves. Apparently it is possible to export arms but not food. These countries were ripped off of their resources, land and so on. We still keep them in semi-colonial bondage, we are associated with it and gestures of neutrality here and there cannot separate us from that fact: we are part of the bloc which exploits most, if not all, of the Third World countries, whether we like it or not. Notwithstanding occasional fine and noble sentiments to the contrary, we are recognised as such. We are recognised as being part of the powerful, rich and wealthy section of the world which makes any concession grudgingly, always puts its own interests first, makes no real effort to understand the problems, attempts to impose political systems which are of our making, tries to sustain political systems which support our particular world view and make no effort whatever to contribute to real development and change. We attach conditions to our aid which will benefit ourselves more than other people. We then suggest that concern about political structures is not really part of our overall objectives.

I would like to say this is a fine and noble motion but, in the context of Ireland's record, our overall identification of foreign affairs strategy and the record of the blocs with which we are associated, including the European Community, it is meaningless and pointless. We are still part of what is effectively an exploiting powerful group living off the poor and the wretched in two-thirds if not three-quarters of this world.

Mr. McDonald

I strongly support this motion and I regret that I cannot agree with the sentiments expressed by the previous speaker. I believe that this joint committee is necessary at this time in this materialistic age. If we are to make any contribution to, or take any stand on the problems that beset, the Third World and the developing countries then at least it must surely be possible to have a vehicle, an organisation, a committee, a forum, call it what you like, in which our own legislators, the two Houses of the Oireachtas will have the opportunity, first hand, of becoming aware of the problems and perhaps meeting the representatives of the people involved and of seeing more closely the gigantic problem that faces anybody who is interested in paying more than lip service to the Third World, to the North-South dialogue, or whatever we want to call it.

I believe that the joint committee as proposed will play a very important role in creating here in the Oireachtas, and through the Oireachtas in the people of Ireland, an awareness of our Christian responsibilities, of our economic responsibilities to bring about a greater shareout of the world's wealth. During the years I had the honour of serving with the present Minister for Defence on the Joint Committee of the European Parliament, the Assembly of the ACP, we had the opportunity of meeting and having discussions with the representatives of some 52 developing countries in Africa and South America. It is only through those contacts that we can appreciate the problem that is there.

I also believe that the public should have an opportunity of seeing and appreciating the tremendous amount of work, progress and contribution made through our Department of Foreign Affairs, through the non-governmental agencies and through the church and other voluntary organisations that have been working quietly and consistently over many decades. When one reads the Brandt Report, on which we had a very interesting debate here a few months ago, one appreciates the problem that exists. I have been interested in this particular aspect of development for a considerable time and during the lifetime of the second last Seanad we succeeded in having an ad hoc committee on which a number of Senators from both sides of the House got together unofficially and had many discussions with members of the diplomatic service accredited to Dublin. Many interested persons who were passing through Dublin came to speak with us at lunchtime or when we could fit them in.

There is a problem here because there is a gap to be filled. I feel very proud of the many highly trained young people who give very generously of their time and who go out and work in these countries with non-governmental services or through the development agencies. The unfortunate thing is that there is no appreciation of their efforts. If a teacher gives two years' service in developing countries it is not recorded or taken into account when the teacher is applying for a job on his or her return. We need to create an awareness of this. There must be recognition of people who are so generous with their lives and their time and who make such a contribution. I know there are some agencies set up to assist these people but, nevertheless, it is not unusual to find that doctors, teachers and nurses, who have done two or three years in helping with the development of some of those nations, can be months before they finally settle back into a job when they return to our country. There is a great deal of work to be done by this joint committee. They should be able to underline the tremendous contribution that the State makes, even though it has not yet reached the United Nations target for our direct contribution. Nevertheless, it is important that this work should be highlighted, that there should be pressure on the Houses of the Oireachtas and on the Minister for Finance of the day to ensure that our national contribution should be kept abreast of the target and that we, as a supposedly Christian country, should be able to give almost a lead in the kind of work that needs to be done if there is to be any kind of fair play in the world, and if the hope and trust of those people in the developing nations are to be maintained. I welcome the setting up of this committee. I wish its members well and I hope they will be able to underline the tremendous work that is at present being and has been carried on, especially by the Department of Foreign Affairs.

Mr. O'Mahony

I, too, welcome the establishment of the committee. It is interesting to note that the concept or the idea for the setting up of the committee began during a meeting organised by some of my colleagues with representatives of the various agencies concerned with Third World development some years ago. The idea was then picked up by the Minister of State in the last administration and has now come to fruition. It is beneficial and good.

I wish to make a number of points briefly. Of particular regret to me is that the present Government have not seen fit to continue the post of Minister of State in the Department of Foreign Affairs with responsibility for development co-operation. That is a retrograde step and we are already beginning to see the results of it. It was noticeable, in the couple of debates that have taken place in the other House on development aid, that the Minister for Foreign Affairs was not in attendance and it is noticeable that he is not in attendance today. I do not suggest for a moment that that is a matter over which he has any control. I am sure he has other important work to do, but it is regrettable that the post of Minister of State in this area has not been maintained. I hope the Taoiseach may reconsider this matter when he comes to fill the remaining five posts at that level.

I would like also to suggest to the Minister — perhaps he would convey the idea to the Government if he thinks there is merit in it — that in the context of the proposed economic plan which I understand we are to have in a matter of months it should be possible to contain within that plan some concept of a time schedule for reaching the UN target of 0.7 per cent of GNP to be devoted to aid. If we are to have a plan which is concerned with various projections into the future, it seems to be sensible that we incorporate within that plan a target of this kind on a matter of such fundamental importance about which there is widespread agreement in our society.

I take this opportunity to ask the Minister — perhaps he may not be in a position to answer today but perhaps the Minister for Foreign Affairs at some other time may be able to do so — whether it is the Government's intention to have a White Paper on development co-operation which was in the course of preparation prior to the last general election? The concept of having a White Paper on this subject was welcomed widely, not only among agencies concerned with Third World problems but also among political groupings generally in the Oireachtas. I hope that though we no longer have a Minister of State with responsibility in this area, the Government will see fit to re-open the files and to continue the work of producing this White Paper so that we will have, at the end of the day, some coherent picture of what it is we are trying to do in relation to Third World development and co-operation.

I would also suggest, and perhaps this is a matter which the committee might take up in more detail, that we need to look at the proportions of aid devoted as between multilateral aid and bilateral aid. The proportions at the moment are that 70 per cent of Irish aid goes through multilateral agencies and that only 30 per cent goes through bilateral programmes. Those proportions are wrong and although I would not suggest what the correct proportions should be, there is a need to increase the proportion of aid which goes through bilateral programmes because these seem to have the most beneficial effects in the beneficiary countries and I suspect that they go more rapidly to the people who most need the support they offer.

Without in the least meaning to introduce a sense of acrimony into the proceedings, I would like to dissociate myself from some remarks made last week in relation to the operations of Trócaire. I do so because while I have a great deal of respect for the intellectual integrity of the person who made the comments it is important since we are debating the matter that we in the Seanad make it clear that we do not believe that the aid programme operated by Trócaire should be concerned primarily with food-aid to the detriment of socio-economic development or indeed consciousness-raising. The programmes undertaken by Trócaire, in so far as I am cognisant of them, provide a reasonable balance as between direct food-aid programmes and general development programmes. It is not appropriate that we should think of our aid or co-operation with the Third World simply in terms of dealing with primary hunger. Our primary responsibility is to assist in the development of those economies through the kinds of programmes that Trócaire are engaged in.

Professor Murphy

I support the proposal and in doing so I would like to echo Senator O'Mahony's regret that the Government have not so far seen fit to appoint a Minister of State with special responsibility for developing countries. If nothing else, the appointment of such a Minister in the last Government focused public attention on the importance of the subject and established a personal link between Ireland and the developing countries.

Senator Ryan's remarks were rather negative and dismissive. I would support Senator McDonald's views that this is a resolution eminently worthy of support. I can see something in Senator Ryan's point, however, and I suggest that the members of the committee when they begin their work should keep two points in mind which might help to throw a different light on the problem and establish a different perspective. One point they might keep in mind is that the term "developing" is perhaps misleading and that the countries which are developing are in their present plight because they have been exploited by the developed countries. The relationship is an unfortunate reciprocal one, not the condescending paternalistic one that we think of when we look at the terms of the motion, that these are countries which through some innate backwardness are not as well developed as we are and we should help them along. The members of the committee would be well advised not to think of the problem along those lines but rather to consider that the developing countries are backward precisely because they have been exploited largely by the Community of which we are a member.

That brings me to the second point which the committee might keep in mind, namely, that Ireland itself is in a sense a developing country, so that we should have a special rapport with the countries which are described in this resolution.

Mrs. Bulbulia

I add my voice to those who have welcomed the establishment of this committee. One, indeed, has a sense of déja vu about the whole exercise because it seems such a little while ago since we gladly welcomed the establishment of this committee which, sadly, never got off the ground due to a whole range of circumstances of which we are all only too aware.

Much of what I should like to say has been said by others, but I should like to repeat what I said while speaking on the International Fund for Commodities Bill — that I deplore the fact that there will not be a Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs with special responsibility for development aid. The last Minister of State with this responsibility shone at his task. He injected an enthusiasm and a verve for the role and succeeded in proclaiming to the nation the importance of this function. Since the last meeting of the Seanad, when we debated items of development aid, it was stated over and over again in relation to development co-operation and development aid that the plight of the people in the Third World is the second most important crisis facing the global community. The very least we could do is to appoint a Minister of State with special responsibilities for this area.

I was disappointed with Senator Ryan's remarks. I do not wish to be contentious, but I find them somewhat despairing and extremely dismissive of the whole notion of this committee. I can understand how one can feel that no good is achieved by the establishment of committees of this nature, but this is an unnecessarily negative attitude to adopt. I should like to refer to Waterford city and county where there is an active person-to-person Third World development programme in operation. It started four or five years ago when the city and county of Waterford formed a relationship with the Kitui area of Kenya. The people working in factories in Waterford make a monthly contribution from their wage packets to this concern. Children from the schools in Waterford correspond with children in Kitui. Factory workers, farmers and people right across the range of social and economic activity in Waterford are in contact with counterparts in Kitui. The awareness of Third World development is higher in Waterford than in any other place in Ireland and there will be a great deal of interest in the Waterford region in the working of this committee.

I should also like to dissociate myself from some remarks made by one of my colleagues. I have respect for his intellectual integrity, but I feel that Trócaire is a development agency and not a relief agency. This has been well and truly established and the public are supportive of the work of Trócaire and of all the development agencies.

To get back to the appointment of the Minister of State at the Department, I would call on Trócaire, Concern, APSO, Comhlámh and all other agencies involved to make their voices heard and call for the establishment of such a Minister. I welcome the setting up of this committee, I wish it well in its work and deliberations.

Mr. O'Connell

I welcome the Minister to the House. I associate myself with the remarks of Senator McDonald in the praise he gave to the various private and voluntary organisations, particularly those established and encouraged by the Churches, which are involved in the process of development. They have made their objectives and methods very clear in their promotional literature and left nobody in any doubt about the purpose and methods which they use.

I found, as did some other Senators, that Senator Ryan's remarks were a bit negative. He said he wanted to make a technical protest against the committee in order to make certain points, but I found it peculiar that he aligned himself, particularly at the end of his remarks, with those public figures and politicians who seem to think that poverty in the world and in this country is a problem of such great magnitude that there is nothing we can do about it — that we should leave it to a few charitable organisations to make a few donations.

Basically, this problem can be solved only by the dictum that you do not give a man a fish: you teach him how to fish. That is what development aid is about. It is also true — this is why I found Senator Ryan's remarks negative — that the problem is of such magnitude and is so fundamental in its origins that to think in terms of solving it by means of a few perfunctory and detailed dilettante gestures is quite inadequate. It is only by structural reforms, by looking at the problem as it is on the ground, that we will eventually deal with it. I regret that somebody who has placed himself on the side of those who are deprived in our own society, should associate himself with those who think problems of this nature are either of such great magnitude that they should be ignored or that they should be dealt with only in a peripheral fashion.

I support the calls for the appointment of the Minister of State with responsibility for development co-operation. The point has been well made with regard to the record of the previous Government in this respect, and it is only fair to mention that the Minister who carried out those duties showed his personal commitment to that work by the fact that he was prepared to visit many of the countries to examine and assess the work being done. I ask the Minister to suggest that the Taoiseach, when he comes to fill those five positions, perhaps we should call them cars, carrots or sticks — I do not know how you fill a carrot or stick — which is what these positions are, according to the media, they are no longer constitutional positions but are tied up with the peculiar machinations of some political parties, should consider the interests of the country and of people outside the country, and therefore appoint to one of those positions somebody who might do some work in that area.

Mrs. Barnes

I join with other Senators in calling on the Taoiseach to appoint a Minister of State, for all the reasons that have been given but also to tie in with what Senator O'Mahony said, that there is evidence in research that has been done regarding aid and development co-operation to the countries who are emerging and developing that what is given through bilateral aid is much more effective than that which is given through multinational aid. Reference has been made to the great work being done by our organisations working from an Irish dimension. So that there will be control over the aid and the development co-operation we can give, there should be integration of our efforts not alone from a financial point of view but in regard to the technical skills we can contribute. If the people of Ireland can relate to the people working in those countries and have evidence of the development that such funding is effecting, it makes sense that there will be far more commitment to it than if it is given through multinationals with whom people have no identity, and might never hear of the effects of the efforts. The evidence is that multinationals through their structure are filled with bureaucracy. Sometimes the channels through which such aid is sent can be open to corruption. Greater emphasis should be placed on bilateral rather than multinational aid, but co-ordination will be needed to make such bilateral aid effective.

An Cathaoirleach

Before I call on the Minister to reply I will call on Senator McDonald for a report from the Committee of Selection.

Debate adjourned.