Billy Kelleher
Ceist:6 Deputy Billy Kelleher asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs if he will provide further detail on the commitment in the programme for Government to establish a civilian corps. [8384/11]
Other Questions
Overseas Development Aid
In keeping with the commitment in the programme for Government, over the coming months I plan to explore options for the establishment of a civilian corps which could allow some jobseekers to use and share their skills in developing countries while retaining some jobseeker's benefit.
Support for volunteering has always been strong in Ireland. Much of the achievement and the strong international reputation of our development programme is built on the contribution of generations of courageous Irish volunteers and missionaries who worked to improve the lives of the world's poorest people. The volunteering experience today contributes to young people's personal and professional development, while providing skills and expertise that complement those existing on the ground.
Since I was appointed Minister of State with responsibility for trade and development, I have begun a process of dialogue with the Irish development non-governmental organisations, both collectively and individually. I hope to meet shortly with the main organisations which send volunteers to work in developing countries. I will explore with them how people who have become unemployed or cannot find employment in Ireland could most usefully play a role in international development, if they wish to do so.
The focus of the Government's aid programme is on the fight against poverty and hunger in some of the poorest countries and communities in the world. It is strongly concentrated in the countries of sub-Saharan Africa. Through the aid programme, which is administered by Irish Aid in the Department of Foreign Affairs, the Government is currently funding the work of about 1,300 development workers, volunteers and missionaries in developing countries. In addition, Ireland's rapid response corps, established by Irish Aid, enables those with specific skills to deploy swiftly in humanitarian crises. I am also examining a pilot initiative at European Union level to develop a European voluntary humanitarian aid corps.
It is clear that volunteers can have a very important role to play as part of Ireland's overall contribution to development. I want to ensure we can build on the contribution already being made by individual Irish volunteers in the most effective, relevant and safest manner possible.
I commend the Government on what appears to be a superb idea which will have my party's active support. Is it envisaged that jobseekers will arrange work through the Department or Irish Aid or will they liaise directly with the relevant charities and organisations? Does the Minister of State have a timescale for engaging with organisations such as GOAL and Trócaire to obtain their input into what appears to be an excellent plan? Will this be part of the jobs initiative — perhaps I should refer to it as a jobs budget — which the Government will announce in the next month or thereabouts?
I do not mind whether the Deputy calls it the jobs budget or jobs initiative. I welcome his support for this proposal. In reply to his earlier question, I have begun to consult and have met the board of Dóchas, an umbrella organisation for all the various bodies, to discuss how this might work. I also met Trócaire and I plan to meet within the next few weeks the various other organisations such as Concern, GOAL and Misean Cara, which represents the missionaries. We already have the mechanism of going through those kinds of bodies. Voluntary Service Overseas is another major organisation for volunteering and it would seem a good channel to use as we know it works well.
With regard to establishing a new mechanism, I am not sure any of us would wish to begin setting up new bodies or organisations, and I would probably be condemned if I suggested that. Primarily, we want to use what we already have. I point out that Irish Aid has a volunteering and information centre on O'Connell Street, Dublin. I would advise anybody who wishes to access information on volunteering to visit the centre, which is in an obvious location with a big shop front-type window.
I do not envisage this will be a specific proposal in the jobs initiative or jobs budget. Frankly, I do not believe it will be ready for that time and those proposals will largely relate to other areas of job creation. We certainly intend to develop this.
Humanitarian Aid
Richard Boyd Barrett
Ceist:7 Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs if he will lend his support to the planned international peace flotilla to Gaza in which an Irish ship and Irish citizens will be participating; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [8810/11]
Ireland's long-standing concern about the humanitarian situation in Gaza is well known. As I stated in my reply to the priority question on Gaza, the slight relaxation of the terms of the blockade in the last year has been completely insufficient. Along with our EU partners, we are continuing to press for a full opening up of the border crossings into Gaza to allow unimpeded flows of humanitarian aid, and normal commercial and human traffic.
I recognise the essentially humanitarian motivation which gave rise to last year's Gaza flotilla and also to the further flotilla now being planned. We will continue to press Israel to do all possible to facilitate those wishing to transport humanitarian goods to Gaza and, in particular, to avoid any repetition of the unacceptable use of force against last year's flotilla.
However, my Department's essential travel advice remains that people should not attempt to sail to Gaza at the present time and certainly should not attempt to break through a naval blockade of the kind which Israel has imposed on Gaza. I am deeply concerned that there is real potential for a similar disastrous outcome this year. The Deputy will understand that I cannot support a project which would involve Irish citizens engaging in actions which could lead them into real danger.
I ask the Tánaiste to reconsider this issue. The more widespread and prominent the support that is given to the flotilla, the greater chance it has of getting through and bringing aid and support to the besieged people of Gaza. If, for example, there was a Government representative on board one of those ships, it would make it far less likely that Israel would attack it. For that reason, the Tánaiste should reconsider and the Government should put representatives on one of those boats. The situation is intolerable for the people of Gaza, as the Tánaiste acknowledged and as most people understand.
In July of last year, Deputy Joe Costello and Mr. Proinsias De Rossa, Labour Party MEP, asked the previous Attorney General to exercise his duty under Irish legislation and the Geneva Convention to bring charges against those who were suspected of war crimes in regard to Operation Cast Lead, the Israeli assault on Gaza and the attack on the flotilla. Now that Deputy Gilmore is in government, will he follow through on that and initiate such proceedings against Israel? Deputy Costello and Mr. De Rossa said it could be done unilaterally in this country so will the Tánaiste do it, as he should?
While no one wants to see bombs or bullets going in either direction, as the Tánaiste said, will he state clearly that there is no equivalence in this situation between one and the other? The basic problem is that Israel refused to accept the outcome of elections in Gaza in 2006 which were acknowledged to be democratic, free and fair. Its refusal to do that lies at the root of the problem and of the siege that followed. Will the Tánaiste state clearly that this is the root of the problem?
My Department has a responsibility to provide travel advice to Irish citizens irrespective of where they are travelling. If somebody wants to travel somewhere, the Department of Foreign Affairs provides a service whereby travel advice is provided as to whether it is safe to travel. I want to make it absolutely clear that the Department's travel advice in respect of the proposed flotilla to Gaza is that it is not safe. We will not encourage Irish citizens to participate in a travel venture where there is a naval blockade and where, as we saw last year, people were killed in that exercise. We have to underline responsibly that it is our view that this is not a safe venture.
In respect of the question of the blockade, the Government's position is very clear. The blockade of Gaza should end. The flow of humanitarian aid, while it should not necessarily be brought in by sea, should be made available by opening up land border access to Gaza to ensure humanitarian aid and goods are enabled to be provided.
It is an outrageous situation — I struggle to find words to do justice to it. The 1.5 million people of Gaza are living in an open-air prison. The international community has stood idly by, with the exception of some honourable people in the NGOs and the United Nations. The people of Gaza have been abandoned to a regime that borders on international terrorism in that Israel is almost a rogue state — that is the reality. Peace activists from around the world, in the absence of actions by their Governments, are trying to bring in vital assistance to these people in an inspirational fashion, despite ten of those activists being murdered in the last effort.
Despite that action, there has been a failure of the international community to respond and to be consistent in its approach to states that behave in this fashion. As Governments will not intervene, there is now a scenario whereby good peace activists, who try to do their bit peacefully, are prevented from doing so. What hope do they have if some Governments, first, will not stand up and condemn Israel solely for its actions, second, will not intervene in any shape or form, and, third, advise those good peace activists who want to do something about this that they should not intervene? They have been utterly abandoned.
How is it we cannot assist the beleaguered, imprisoned people of Gaza in some way? What hope can we give them? What leadership can be given by the Irish Government, which is respected internationally in regard to human rights? We must deal with this issue.
We need to do something; words are not enough. The Tánaiste did not indicate whether the Government will follow through on the call by his party colleagues, Deputy Costello and Proinsias De Rossa, MEP, to bring charges against Israel for its involvement in the brutal invasion of Gaza in 2006 and for its attack on the aid flotilla which was, by any standards, an illegal and immoral act of piracy by a rogue state trying to prevent badly needed aid and support from reaching the beleaguered and crucified people of Gaza. Will there be more than words? Will the Government condemn outright, forthrightly and unequivocally, Israel's brutal siege of the people of Gaza and its refusal to recognise free and fair elections? Whatever we may think of who is elected, must we not say that Israel is obliged to recognise the outcome of free and fair elections among the people of Palestine, Gaza or anywhere else?
As I said in response to an earlier question, this issue is very much a priority for me and for the Government. I made clear at the European Union Foreign Affairs Council on 12 April that the Government and I want to see this issue addressed by the council.
Our view is that the blockade should not exist, that the situation in Gaza is absolutely intolerable, and that there is a necessity to allow humanitarian aid, building materials and so on into Gaza so that trade and other activities can continue. It should not be the case that humanitarian aid to Gaza must be delivered by sea. I have accepted and acknowledged the motivation of the people who are engaged in that, and I have made clear that the blockade should not apply. I assure Deputies that this is an issue to which we will return.
With regard to the comments made by Deputy Costello and Proinsias De Rossa, MEP, I will have my Department review them.
EU Accession
Niall Collins
Ceist:8 Deputy Niall Collins asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs if he is supportive of an application to join the EU by Iceland; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [8823/11]
Iceland applied for EU membership in 2009 and accession negotiations were formally opened in July 2010. In its most recent annual progress report on Iceland, published last November, the Commission stated that the overall level of Iceland's preparedness to meet EU legislative requirements is good. Through its existing membership of the European Economic Area and the Schengen Area Iceland is already closely integrated with the EU in many sectors and this significantly facilitates the negotiations.
The process is currently at what is known as the "screening" phase, during which the Commission assesses the degree of compatibility of Iceland's laws with those of the EU. At the next Intergovernmental Conference with Iceland, to be held on 27 June, it is expected that the EU Presidency will open a number of negotiation chapters with Iceland on which the screening process has been completed. It is at this stage that actual negotiations can begin. Based on this close relationship and on our own positive experience of enlargement in the past, Ireland supports the EU candidacy of Iceland, a country with which we have strong ties of geography, history, culture and politics.
Accession is a negotiated process and, as in any negotiation, the eventual outcome and timeframe cannot be predicted with precision. Areas where significant differences between Icelandic law and EU law still exist and among those that can be expected to present challenges during the negotiations are fisheries, agriculture and rural development, environment including whaling, regional policy, and food safety including veterinary and phytosanitary regulations.
Ireland will continue to play an active role in protecting our own and the EU's interests in respect of negotiations with Iceland. In this regard we look forward to working closely with Iceland, with the European Commission and with our fellow member states to ensure a satisfactory outcome to the Icelandic accession negotiations that is of mutual benefit to Iceland and the EU.
I thank the Tánaiste for his response. Is he concerned that the dispute that has arisen between Iceland and the Dutch and British in terms of loan repayments is likely to emerge as a significant impediment to the advancement towards EU accession by Iceland? Has he had discussions or does he intend to have discussions with his European partners on this matter? What is his view on the recent statement by the Dutch Finance Minister, Jan Kees de Jager, that the Netherlands will block Iceland's bid to join the European Union unless the dispute over €1.3 billion in unpaid debts is resolved?
The collapse of Iceland's private banking sector in October 2008 developed into a diplomatic dispute when the United Kingdom and the Netherlands insisted that Iceland guarantee bank deposits of their citizens held in the collapsed Icelandic bank Icesave. Both Governments provided loans to facilitate this guarantee and the dispute has since centred on the terms for repayment.
The Icesave dispute had hampered progress towards the opening of accession negotiations with Iceland. However, member states unanimously agreed at last June's European Council to proceed with the opening of formal talks. The conclusions highlighted the need for Iceland to address existing obligations such as those identified by the European Free Trade Association, EFTA, surveillance authority under the Agreement on the European Economic Area.
In a referendum on 9 April Icelandic citizens voted not to accept the terms of repayment negotiated between Iceland, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. The matter will be now dealt with by the European Free Trade Association court. Both the United Kingdom and the Netherlands have expressed disappointment at the referendum result while stressing their commitment to recovering the loans. The Icelandic Government has stressed that the referendum result will not affect its application for EU membership. The European Commission, meanwhile, has described the issue as a bilateral matter which must be resolved outside of EU negotiation process. However, it is expected that the Netherlands and the United Kingdom will be reluctant to allow EU membership negotiations to conclude until the Icesave issue has been dealt with to their satisfaction.
Does the Tánaiste not agree that we could take a leaf out of the Icelandic people's book in holding a referendum on our bank bailout? Icelandic voters were allowed to have their say and that gave their Government a stronger hand in negotiations on how to deal with their banking crisis. The demand of the people, expressed in two referenda, that the bondholders should pay some of the cost offers lessons to us. Does the Tánaiste agree that one lesson from the situation following those referenda is that the sky did not fall on the heads of the people of Iceland? Negotiations continue and the country is probably in a stronger position as a result of the people being allowed to express their view in a referendum. Perhaps we should consider doing the same.
Ireland's situation is quite different from that of Iceland which concerns a bilateral dispute between Iceland and the United Kingdom and the Netherlands regarding the loss of private depositor funds guaranteed under EFTA rules and whether Iceland should recover such losses. Iceland's referendum concerned this issue specifically and was not linked to the programme of support which the Icelandic Government negotiated with the IMF. Iceland has confirmed that it remains committed to the IMF programme, which is progressing well.
The issue was best summarised in a recent editorial in The Irish Times which states:
Despite the two Icelandic referendum results its elected Government did not unilaterally abandon legal obligations but rather sought to negotiate the best available deal. The country is still bound up with the international system and seeks to enhance that position by joining the EU.
If the bilateral difficulties Iceland has with the United Kingdom and the Netherlands are not concluded to the satisfaction of those countries, the latter may veto their accession to the EU.
Human Rights Issues
Charlie McConalogue
Ceist:9 Deputy Charlie McConalogue asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs his views on whether the lifting of sanctions by the EU on the Burmese Government is appropriate following comments made by Aung San Suu Kyi that sanctions must remain in place until something has changed in Burma; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [8820/11]
Sanctions against Burma were renewed for a further 12 months at the April session of the Foreign Affairs Council. Ireland was to the fore in the preparation of this decision, arguing for the extension of restrictive measures by the European Union. In taking this decision, Ministers were very much aware of the views of Aung San Suu Kyi. By renewing sanctions, the European Union has maintained the prohibition on the sale, supply, transfer or export of equipment and technology to enterprises in Burma engaged in logging and timber processing, mining and processing of specified natural resources, semi-precious and precious stones. The purchase, import or transport of products from these industries into the European Union is also prohibited.
Under the restrictive measures, the visa ban and asset freeze remain in place against a specified list of individuals with links to the regime, including all members of the new Burmese Government who were appointed following the deeply flawed parliamentary elections last year. However, to allow for the pursuit of constructive engagement with the new Government, Ministers agreed to suspend imposition of the restrictive measures in the specific cases of the Burmese Foreign Minister and those new Government appointees who do not have military backgrounds. In renewing sanctions, Ministers reiterated their commitment to the people of Burma and demanded the release of all political prisoners and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms in Burma.
While Ireland is a strong supporter of maintaining sanctions until genuine progress on human rights and political reform takes place, we do not view sanctions as an end in themselves. The European Union stands ready to respond positively to genuine progress towards democratisation and respect for human rights and this must include full respect for the rights of all of Burma's ethnic minorities.
I am sure the Tánaiste and all Members present welcome the release of Aung San Suu Kyi after many years under house arrest. While I welcome the Tánaiste's response, to clarify, is he aware of plans among his colleagues at European Union level to visit Burma to engage directly with Aung San Suu Kyi or her political party? Might it be envisaged that an invitation be extended to Mme Suu Kyi to visit Europe or Ireland, given the many admirers she has both here and throughout Europe?
As part of the effort to engage constructively with the new Burmese Government, Ministers agreed to lift the prohibition on high-level visits to Burma. However, it was agreed that any such visits must be carefully co-ordinated in Brussels with defined terms of reference. Delegations visiting Burma must also be allowed to meet Burmese opposition and civil society leaders, including Aung San Suu Kyi. While I have no plans at present to visit Burma, I will keep the matter under review.
I am mindful that Aung San Suu Kyi has the freedom of Dublin. As Deputy Ó Fearghaíl observed, she is a lady who is hugely respected worldwide as a Nobel peace prize winner and an inspirational person. Almost single-handedly, she has drawn international attention to the reprehensible actions of that regime. My difficulty is that while the European Union has opened up the door to Burma and has bilateral agreements with Israel, in contrast it has a common agreement arrangement whereby all trade with Cuba basically is blocked. Any international observer observing what is taking place in Cuba will note it has one of the best health systems in the world, one of the greatest education systems in the world and the highest level of literacy in the world under UNESCO——
Does the Deputy have a question?
Will the Tánaiste challenge the double standards of the European Union in respect of its trade agreements, which clearly fall in behind NATO's agenda rather than what is right?
I welcome the Tánaiste's support and commitment for sanctions against the Burmese dictatorship and in support of Aung San Suu Kyi. As has been noted, she is an inspirational figure and her campaigning and that of her supporters have brought pressure to bear on Burma to an extent. However, I refer to the issue of consistency and double standards in another regard. Should the Government, within the European Union, not call for sanctions equally as much against any despotic dictatorship that systematically denies democratic and civil rights to its citizens or ruthlessly suppresses political opposition? Should it not call specifically for sanctions and be a voice calling loudly within the European Union for sanctions just like those imposed on Burma? In this regard, I refer in particular to demanding an end to arms sales by Western and European Governments to regimes such as those in Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Libya when Gadaffi was the West's friend and so on.
Allow the Tánaiste to reply to these questions.
I refer to hundreds of billions in arms sales. Should Ireland not demand clearly and unequivocally, within the European Union, sanctions against such regimes, as well as an end to arms sales?
This particular question pertains to Burma and the question asked was whether it was my view that sanctions might be lifted by the European Union in respect of Burma. My reply was that sanctions have been renewed against Burma. A small exception or derogation has been made regarding the sanctions that apply to visas, travel restrictions and so on in respect of the Burmese Foreign Minister and a small number of Ministers who were not part of the previous military regime with a view to opening up dialogue with the Burmese regime to emphasise the importance of human rights, respect for democracy and the role that Aung San Suu Kyi and others who have been involved in civil society have played in that country. That is the position taken by Ireland and the European Union.
I am quite happy to respond to questions on Cuba or anywhere else if Members wish to table them. However, when a question is tabled on sanctions in respect of an individual country and I give the answer, thereby confirming that the European Union has continued its actions, it is not the most constructive of approaches to state, "Fine, you have done Burma, now why do you not do everywhere else?".
My point concerned the double standards.
There are no double standards.
My point pertained to the double standards of the European Union.
International Agreements
Michael Colreavy
Ceist:10 Deputy Michael Colreavy asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs his plan to incorporate a recommendation as stated at the Irish Joint Consortium Annual Event in November 2010, that Ireland’s NAP should include a strong monitoring plan that is implemented effectively and ambitiously particularly one that includes oversight by the Houses of the Oireachtas and allow for Opposition Members to hold the Government to account on this matter in his preparation to adopt Ireland’s NAP for implementation of UNSCR 1325. [8787/11]
The recommendation referred to by the Deputy is one of a number of submissions received by my Department relating to the development of a national action plan, NAP, on United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325 on women, peace and security. As stated in my earlier reply to Question No. 2, the resolution calls for an increase in the participation of women in peacemaking and peace building processes, the protection of women and girls in armed conflict and the incorporation of a gender perspective into peacekeeping and peace building processes. In developing our NAP, a wide-ranging consultation process took place involving Departments and Government agencies, the Defence Forces and the Garda Síochána, as well as representatives of civil society and academia. A comprehensive audit of Government activity in the areas covered by the resolution was conducted and civil society engaged in a consultative process with women affected by conflict in Ireland.
I agree with the Deputy that our NAP should include a monitoring and evaluation process that allows progress in implementing the plan to be tracked. I envisage recommending the establishment of a monitoring group whose membership would be reflective of all agencies working in the areas covered by the Security Council resolution, both in Government and civil society. Once the Oireachtas has completed the process of the establishment of its committees, my officials would then engage with the appropriate committee with a view to ensuring that the Oireachtas is informed on progress in implementing the NAP.
I again thank the Tánaiste and note this issue was dealt with to some extent earlier. However, I seek some specific information from the Tánaiste. What level of organisation will the Department of Foreign Affairs commit to this? Overseeing the implementation of the plan across the areas required is a significant task. Will a full-time or part-time person be allocated? Regarding the role of parliamentarians in the accountability process, the Tánaiste referred to liaising with the committees following their establishment, but what will our function be and how regularly will the implementation of this matter be monitored by us?
We are considering these issues in the context of finalising the national action plan. As I indicated in my response to another question, we must strike a balance between our aspirations in the national action plan and what is practically feasible. The issues we are considering are the practical implications of the plan's implementation. I sought for and received the opinions of various Departments in this regard. After we finalise the plan, it will be brought to the Government and then made known. I envisage a monitoring and evaluation process, one in which the range of interests involved in the consultative process will be involved. I also envisage that the monitoring and evaluation will be subject to one of the Oireachtas committees after their establishment.
Will the Tánaiste acknowledge that, when Ireland enters into international agreements like Security Council Resolution 1325 or our millennium goal targets on human rights and international justice, they should not be subject to the caveat that budget measures may change? They should be honoured, otherwise the international community and the UN will be undermined. These resolutions and agreements are pointless unless they are honoured.
I agree there should not be caveats. For this reason, I am taking care to ensure that the way in which we advance the national action plan in terms of the resolution can be honoured. I agree with the Deputy that we should not make commitments if we believe we will not be in a position to fulfil them, as that would undermine our standing internationally. I am taking some care to ensure the plan as agreed is implementable.
Overseas Missions
Richard Boyd Barrett
Ceist:11 Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs if he attended or was represented at ministerial or official level at the NATO Foreign Ministers meeting in Berlin on 14 April 2011; and if he will report on that meeting. [8809/11]
Ireland was not represented either at ministerial or official level at the meeting of NATO foreign Ministers in Berlin on 14 April. Apart from this meeting, there were meetings of the NATO-Georgia Commission, the NATO-Russia Council, the NATO-Ukraine Council, the countries taking part in the NATO-led operation in Libya and the countries contributing to the International Security Assistance Force, ISAF, in Afghanistan. As one of the 48 countries that contribute to ISAF, Ireland attended the ISAF meeting. The EU and the special representative of the UN Secretary General in Afghanistan also attended the meeting. Ireland was represented at official level and our delegation was headed by the political director of my Department.
The meeting confirmed the support of ISAF-contributing countries for the transition of seven areas to Afghan security control. This is the first tranche of the transition process announced by President Karzai last month. The aim of transition is to hand over security control to the Afghan army and police. This will be done in stages, accompanied by training and mentoring for the Afghan forces, which will become the focus of ISAF's work. The process should be completed by the end of 2014.
The meeting endorsed the strategy for the first tranche of transition, which has been designed jointly with Afghan partners. In addition, contributors underlined the importance of significantly increased political and diplomatic efforts to secure lasting peace in Afghanistan. This includes support for the process of reconciliation launched by President Karzai's High Peace Council last year.
Is it appropriate that troops from a neutral country such as Ireland should be involved with NATO in Afghanistan in what is by any serious definition an aggressive military action headed up by the United States, Britain and other large powers in a conflict characterised by atrocious violence against a civilian population, including the use of drones to bomb civilian areas on the border with Pakistan and within Pakistan and actions that have claimed the lives of many innocent civilians in Afghanistan? Given the Tánaiste's reference to President Karzai, does he not accept the President is a puppet——
The Deputy's time is up.
——and the elections that brought him to power were rigged? What are we doing there? Why have we troops in Afghanistan when we are supposed to be a neutral country? Why are we linked with the NATO military alliance, a US-led, aggressive, Cold War relic?
The Deputy's time is well over.
The Deputy misunderstands Ireland's participation in ISAF. The force has a UN mandate, one that has been renewed annually since 2001. The current mandate was extended until 13 October 2011 by Resolution 1943 and enjoys the support of the 48 participating ISAF countries. ISAF's goal is to help restore security in Afghanistan, which is crucial if normal life is to be restored for people who have suffered a long-term conflict and if there is to be broader regional stability. The Irish contingent consists of seven members of the Defence Forces who are based at ISAF's headquarters in Kabul in non-combatant roles. In addition, Ireland has deployed civilian personnel with the EU police training mission. Ireland is also devoting considerable effort to economic development and reconstruction. Since 2007, Irish Aid has allocated more than €24 million in relief, recovery and development assistance to Afghanistan. More generally, the EU spends close to €1 billion per year on various civilian, political and development activities.
Written Answers follow Adjournment Debate