Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 14 Jun 1990

Vol. 399 No. 12

Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Overseas Development Aid.

Joe Sherlock

Ceist:

4 Mr. Sherlock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if his attention has been drawn to the fact that recently published statistics show that of the 18 wealthiest member states of the OECD, Ireland comes bottom of the league in terms of its contribution to overseas development aid; the steps he intends to take; in light of these figures, to increase Irish aid; if any target has been set for the achievement of the United Nations target of 0.7 per cent; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

Mervyn Taylor

Ceist:

28 Mr. Taylor asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs when Ireland will meet the United Nations target for overseas development aid; if he envisages that this will happen in this millennium; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

I propose to take Questions Nos. 4 and 28 together.

I am aware of the statistics referred to by the Deputy which show Ireland's position compared to other OECD countries in terms of official development assistance as a percentage of GNP.

The Government remain committed to achieving the UN target of 0.7 per cent of GNP for official development assistance. This was first adopted by Ireland in 1970 and has been accepted by every Government since then. No date has ever been set for its attainment and in the present budgetary circumstances it is not possible to set a date at this point. However, it is the intention of the Government to work towards it as our economic circumstances permit.

I accept the Taoiseach's assurance that the Government are committed to reaching this target but surely the reverse has been the case over the past few years. There has been a decline in Overseas Development Aid. Would the Taoiseach not agree that it would make sense to institute a programme over a period of years to reach this target? It has been suggested by Trócaire that it should at least be brought up to the 1986 level over a two-year period and then increased annually by .05 per cent until it reached the 0.7 per cent target. This would at least be an indication in concrete terms of the commitment the Taoiseach speaks about.

I am sure all Deputies would wish us to do better on this front. I hope we will be able to move towards our target in the years ahead. It is very largely a matter of Exchequer resources and our financial position. Very soon we will be starting to look in detail at the Estimates for 1991 and I am sure the arguments will be rehearsed again in favour of doing better. I will, of course, be sympathetic to those arguments but we have to try to keep the overall situation in view. There are internal pressures for more expenditure for desirable social purposes just as there are pressures for this area. It is a question of trying to be as even-handed and equitable as possible.

I know the Deputy is aware that Ireland's contribution to the Third World is not confined to our financial contribution under the Overseas Development Aid programme; we make enormous contributions in other ways at a personal level.

Given that the Taoiseach was the first Taoiseach to preside over a specific reduction in the amount of moneys made available for this area in the 1987 budget, does he not agree, having regard to his frequently made claims that the economy has now recovered, that he is now in a position to restore in the Estimates for 1991 the sums of money he specifically ordered to be taken out in 1987 or does he doubt the validity of his claims that there has been an economic recovery?

I do not understand why the Deputy should be contentious in the matter in this way by saying I specifically ordered something to be taken out——

I have been so informed.

The Deputy was misinformed.

I am glad to hear that.

The Deputy should not make these wild statements. I am trying to be as helpful to the Dáil as possible on this issue. In the Estimates for 1987 and subsequent years we did not seek out an area of this kind and inflict some particular punishment on it; we had to have an across-the-board reduction in expenditure and, unfortunately, this area, which is very close to the hearts and minds of all Deputies, had to suffer along with others.

More than others.

All I can say to the House is that as we approach the Estimates for 1991 and future years we will see what can be done.

Does the Taoiseach not agree——

Deputies De Rossa and Owen rose.

Order, please. A number of Deputies are offering——

Including me.

I observe the Deputy. I will entertain the Deputies provided they are very brief. I want to make some worth-while progress on questions before the Taoiseach today.

So do I.

They are all very important questions and I am not prepared to remain unduly long on any one question.

Does the Taoiseach not agree that even though previous Governments also had to make cuts across the board they specifically excluded Overseas Development Aid until 1987? If we do have a much flaunted economic recovery, can he indicate to the House when we will get back to the equivalent of the 1986 Estimates?

I appeal for brevity, please.

The Deputy is right in saying that there has been a very considerable degree of economic recovery. That is recognised not just internally but externally also. I think he would also have to acknowledge at the same time that any time I have spoken in this area about this aspect I have reiterated again and again the continuing need for financial discipline. I think every responsible Deputy would agree with that. Whereas we have been making progress and our budgetary and financial situation has been steadily improving, at the same time we must continue to impose rigid budgetary discipline until we can get our overall position back into reasonable line with the rest of our Community partners, from whom we are still far away. We should not be too acrimonious about this. I recognise that we should be doing better in this area and we will seek to do so when we can.

Does the Taoiseach not agree that the brunt of the cutbacks have affected the bi-lateral aid programme so that there is nothing to replace the projects started in the eighties and now coming to a close in the host countries and that they will be the big losers in the cutbacks in the aid programme?

This proves that the money which was spent earlier was wasted.

I suppose that is inevitable because, as the Deputy knows, we have international commitments on the other side.

Exactly.

Does the Taoiseach not agree that the date set by the UN to achieve their target was 1980, which is well passed? Does he not further agree that our contribution of 0.158 per cent of our GNP is equivalent to the sum we gave in the 1973-74 period? Will he confirm that as only 9 per cent of the money now available is going to new projects this will mean the demise and death of the bi-lateral aid programme? Will he give an assurance to the House——

I did ask for brevity.

——that as President of the EC he will restore the £1 million taken from the Overseas Development Aid budget by the Minister for Finance, Deputy Reynolds, after the budget——

I think the Deputy has made her point.

Will the Taoiseach give a commitment in regard to that £1 million?

I cannot go any further than the commitment I have already given. We will continue our best efforts in keeping with the resources available to us and the demands made on the Exchequer from countless deserving sources to do the best we can.

Deputy De Rossa, for a final question.

I will be very brief.

Go raibh maith agat.

Does the Taoiseach not agree that the recent survey launched by the Minister of State, Deputy Calleary, indicated that there was substantial support among Irish people for an increase in Overseas Development Aid — something like 90 per cent of them support the idea of increasing Overseas Development Aid? If the Taoiseach has figures with him will he indicate how much it would cost to restore our Overseas Development Aid to the 1986 level?

That is a very special question.

The only thing I can say in relation to the Deputy's statement about the survey is that in any survey — Irish people are humanitarian and generous and they have proven this time and again by their individual efforts — you will get unanimous support for more resources to be allocated to any desirable charitable purpose put before the people. That is not their whole argument——

I suggest that the Minister of State——

Can we come to deal with another question, please?

That survey showed the costs involved——

I am calling Question No. 5.

Those people were asked a straightforward question——

Question No. 5 has been called and Deputy De Rossa will resume his seat.

There were other implications involved——

Deputy De Rossa may not ignore the Chair. Deputy De Rossa, please resume your seat.

The Minister of State, Deputy Calleary, launched this survey——

If the Deputy continues to disobey the Chair he knows what the outcome of that action will be.

Barr
Roinn