JOINT COMMITTEE ON EUROPEAN AFFAIRS díospóireacht -
Thursday, 12 Nov 2009

General Affairs and External Relations Council: Discussion with Ministers of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs.

Chairman

I ask members to ensure that their mobile phones, which interfere with the broadcasting equipment, are switched off. Apologies have been received from Deputy Creighton and Senators Cummins and de Búrca.

The first item on the agenda is the forthcoming General Affairs and External Relations Council meeting. I welcome the Ministers of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs, Deputies Dick Roche and Peter Power. We have a long agenda for this meeting. I will call on the Ministers of State to make their presentations and I will then allow members to respond. I will also allow for short closing statements, as and if necessary. Members received briefing documents from the Department of Foreign Affairs, Trócaire and Concern. I call on the Minister of State, Deputy Roche, to make his presentation.

Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs (Deputy Dick Roche)

I welcome this opportunity to review with the committee the agenda for next week's General Affairs and External Relations Council. With the Chairman's permission, I propose to give members a brief outline of the key items discussed at the October meeting before turning to the items on the agenda for this month.

The General Affairs Council adopted conclusions on the Baltic Sea strategy and discussed what were then draft conclusions for the European Council. Yesterday, the Taoiseach and I gave a full account to the Dáil of that European Council meeting. Many of the Ministers at the general affairs Council meeting expressed warm congratulations to Ireland on the outcome of the recent referendum. Over dinner, Ministers discussed the Iranian nuclear programme and the political situation in Iran.

On 27 October the external relations Council discussed the situation in Afghanistan, with Ministers agreeing that it is facing a critical period after the next round of elections and requires a truly new start. Ministers discussed developments in the Middle East, agreeing on the need to develop the EU's input into the peace process. Ministers also discussed the situation in Sri Lanka. In addition, they agreed on the need to give support to the new Government of Moldova.

Next week's meeting will be a so-called "jumbo" General Affairs and External Relations Council session in which Ministers for Defence and Ministers for Development also take part. I propose to outline those issues to be discussed at sessions which will be attended by Foreign Ministers only or at which they will be joined by colleagues. My fellow Minister of State, Deputy Peter Power, will comment on the other key matters.

The general affairs Council will meet on the afternoon of 16 November. As outlined in the Dáil yesterday, the Presidency plans to hold an orientation debate on the sustainable development strategy. It also intends to structure debate on this around two questions. The first of these relates to the priority areas on which the strategy should focus in the future and the second concerns how the strategy should be brought forward, particularly in light of the review of the Lisbon strategy.

There will be an orientation debate on the post-Lisbon strategy. The spring European Council is expected to deal with the question of a follow-up strategy. There is a clear wish on the part of the Presidency to ensure that this discussion will complement work going on elsewhere, including that being done by the ECOFIN and the competitiveness councils. Europe faces a serious economic challenge during the next decade, not just in recovering from the current financial crisis but also in respect of competing Asian and other countries as our population begins to age. The successor to the Lisbon strategy must focus on actions member states can take, collectively and at national level, in order to allow the EU to compete successfully in world markets.

Ministers are expected to hold a short preliminary discussion on preparations for the next European Council meeting, which is scheduled to take place on 10 and 11 December. Issues that are expected to arise at that meeting include the UN Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen, which commences on 7 December, the Stockholm programme, financial supervision, the current economic and financial situation, immigration and asylum. It can be expected that, with its entry into force on 1 December, matters related to implementation of the Treaty of Lisbon will be also discussed.

The UN Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen will commence on 7 December and the Council is expected to take the opportunity provided by its December meeting to reaffirm its commitment to an ambitious outcome from the conference. The Stockholm multi-annual programme for EU work in the area of freedom, security and justice, is expected to be adopted. On financial supervision and the current economic situation, there is expected to be a discussion which will follow on from that which took place at the October meeting of the European Council. The Council is also expected to discuss the establishment of the new European asylum support office.

Foreign and Defence Ministers will meet in an informal session on Monday evening to discuss current challenges in the field of crisis management. The Secretary General of NATO, Mr. Rasmussen, has been also invited to attend this session. Discussion is likely to focus on the areas, particularly Afghanistan, where both the EU and NATO have operations. The situation in Kosovo and the efforts of the two organisations to combat piracy off Somalia may be also discussed.

Over dinner on Monday, 16 November, Foreign Ministers will discuss Russia in the context of the forthcoming EU-Russia summit, which will take place in Stockholm on 18 November. Russia is an important strategic partner for the EU, particularly in the context of trade, energy and the common neighbourhood. The EU has proposed the following agenda items for the summit: climate change and energy; the economic and financial crisis; EU-Russia relations — including negotiations on the new EU-Russia agreement; and international issues. Other matters which may arise include: human rights -particularly the situation in the northern Caucasus; the common neighbourhood; and Russia's WTO membership.

The external relations Council will open on the morning of Tuesday, 17 November. The first item on its agenda will be Ukraine. Ministers will discuss Ukraine in the context of the forthcoming EU-Ukraine summit, which will take place in Kiev on 4 December 2009. The summit will discuss the financial and economic crisis, climate change and energy, internal developments in Ukraine, internal developments in the EU, EU-Ukraine relations, the Eastern Partnership, and other international issues. The serious economic difficulties being experienced by Ukraine and its crucial energy relations with Russia, which are constantly monitored by the EU, are also likely to be discussed at the summit. Members will recall that the breakdown in that relationship last year led to significant difficulties, particularly in Bulgaria and Romania. Ireland supports the ongoing development of the EU-Ukraine relationship and welcomes the progress made on the new association agreement.

Ministers may discuss Somalia, in particular, the possibility of further ESDP assistance to Somalia to complement the existing and successful EU anti-piracy naval Operation Atalanta. There is widespread agreement among EU partners and in the international community that there is an urgent need to address the root of piracy, which originates from the lawlessness plaguing Somalia. A number of United Nations Security Council resolutions have called for support to the Somali Transitional Federal Government and its security sector. In response to these resolutions, Ministers may discuss a Presidency proposal for a one-year mission to train the security forces of the Somali Government.

Belarus is also listed as a possible item for discussion at the GAERC. The EU is considering whether to extend the sanctions regime for senior officials, as well as the suspension of the travel restrictions element of the sanctions regime. Discussion on this will continue in Brussels at official level this week, with a view to agreement by Ministers at the GAERC.

Under any other business, Ministers will consider progress to date and future steps in enhancing civilian capabilities for EU missions. The Swedish Presidency has pursued an ambitious agenda this semester in the area of civilian ESDP, which has sought to address shortfalls in the areas of deployment, human resources, equipping and financing of civilian missions. Ministers for Defence will meet in separate session and discuss European Defence Agency activities, consider how best to enhance capabilities required for EU military missions, discuss the possibility of further ESDP assistance to Somalia, and discuss defence-related aspects of the Lisbon Treaty. Ministers for development will meet in separate session. My colleague, Deputy Peter Power, will brief the committee on that session shortly.

There will be a joint session of Foreign Affairs Ministers and Development Ministers. This will discuss Afghanistan in the context of democracy support in EU external relations. Council conclusions on democracy support in EU external relations will be adopted. These are aimed at increasing the effectiveness and coherence of the EU's support for building and supporting democracy. Ireland is broadly supportive of these efforts. Improved governance, accountability and transparency are all important yardsticks with which to measure progress toward an equitable and sustainable democracy. Furthermore, they are essential tools in the fight against poverty. The Council's discussion will focus on Afghanistan as an example for the draft conclusions on democracy support. We have supported the Afghan Reconstruction Trust Fund since 2002, and view this as an important mechanism for facilitating Afghan ownership of the development agenda. The Afghanistan context presents a formidable challenge. However, the difficult context illustrates the importance of the EU's approach to democracy support, which combines political and development efforts and instruments to maximum effect. The head of the UN assistance mission in Afghanistan, Kai Eide, will also attend this element of the GAERC, and I look forward to an update from him on events in the country.

There will be a joint session of Ministers for Defence and Foreign Affairs to discuss significant developments in European security and defence policy. With regard to current missions, Ministers will consider the future of Operation EUFOR Althea within the evolving political context in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Althea has substantially accomplished its current mandate and Ministers will look forward to transforming it into a support and training operation with a purely advisory role. This will take place within a broader context of stability, in particular, the stability which would be achieved by a transition from the Office of High Representative to an enhanced EUSR presence. The need to make political progress in Bosnia was underlined at the Camp Butmir talks held near Sarajevo last month. Presidency Foreign Minister Bildt, US Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg and EU Enlargement Commissioner Rehn jointly hosted meetings with the leaders of the three main communities in Bosnia-Herzegovina. The EU and the US made a series of proposals designed to improve the functioning of the political system there. There was a particular focus on the impediments to transition from the Office of High Representative. While the parties were not in a position to accept the necessary compromises at that stage, the Presidency felt there were grounds for cautious optimism. The Commission has said recently that, due to lack of progress in a number of key areas, there was concern that Bosnia-Herzegovina could be left behind while its neighbours progress towards their European perspective.

The Council is expected to issue a declaration, which will mark the tenth anniversary of ESDP. This will note how the Council, as the operational component of the CFSP, has enabled the Union to become a more effective global actor through its contribution to international peace and security. The declaration will note that the Union has deployed civilian and military operations across a wide range of peace support activities from conflict prevention to crisis management to post-conflict peace-building tasks. Special emphasis is placed on the need to strengthen the EU's common institutional framework, including through implementation of the Lisbon treaty.

I am grateful for the opportunity to set out GAERC's agenda to the committee and I will be pleased to take comments and to respond to questions.

Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs (Deputy Peter Power)

I thank the committee for the opportunity to brief members on the key issues that will be dealt with at the Development Ministers meeting next week to welcome the input of the committee into our thinking and our positions in advance of the meeting. The agenda for the meeting reflects the discussions taking place within the EU on how we can ensure effective results from our aid and development programmes in the face of the continuing economic crisis.

The reality of the international economic crisis is that the needs of the poorest countries are growing at a time when aid budgets are under pressure across the developing world. The scale of the challenge means that it will not be tackled by overseas development aid, ODA, volumes alone. Next September, world leaders will gather in New York to assess progress towards achieving the millennium development goals, which were set in 2000 for the year 2015. Even as we begin the detailed preparatory work for the summit, it is clear there will have to be a stronger focus internationally on making our aid work better, delivering more effective results where they are most needed. Ireland has been recognised by the OECD this year as "a champion in making aid work more effective", and we have worked hard with our partners in the run up to next week's meeting in order that conclusions can be agreed on an operational framework on aid effectiveness, policy coherence for development and climate change and development.

Ministers will also review our ODA commitments as a Union and as member states and there will be a discussion on the potential for greater co-ordination in our approach to the provision of budget support to developing country governments. The meeting will also include a joint session of Foreign Affairs Ministers and Development Ministers, which will adopt conclusions on democracy building in EU external relations.

The meeting will open with a breakfast discussion on ODA commitments. The EU is committed to achieving the target of spending 0.7% of GNP on ODA by 2015. Ireland is well ahead of most member states in progress towards the target. It has set itself the target of the year 2012 by which to reach this commitment — three full years ahead of other EU countries. Even after adjustments we had to make this year, we estimate, conservatively, that our total ODA budget for 2009, which is €696 million, will represent at least 0.48% of GNP. This places us fifth in the EU rankings, and sixth globally. However, aid budgets are being reduced in many developed countries and the European Union will have to examine carefully the credibility of its actions and policies in the context of the targets we have set for 2015, when the world will measure performance against the millennium development goals.

I wish to take this opportunity to reaffirm to the committee the Government's commitment to resume the growth of Ireland's aid programme when economic circumstances permit, in much the same manner as in recent years where increases in ODA were significantly ahead of increases in our economic growth. The adjustments we have been compelled to implement have been motivated solely by the need to restore public finances. Without sustainable public finances, we cannot have a growing ODA budget. We remain firmly focused on the fight against global poverty and hunger. As the committee is aware, I designated hunger and food security as key areas for the Irish aid programme. The approach we are taking is understood by many of my colleagues across Europe and by the Secretary General of the OECD, Mr. Angel Gurria, whom I met on his recent visit to Ireland. More importantly, in my role as Minister of State with responsibility for overseas development, I am determined to ensure that our partners, especially in our programme countries, are assured of our strong and strategic commitment to working with them in the years ahead on the basis of our commitment to ending poverty and hunger.

I will move on now to discuss the area of aid effectiveness, an area to which we are particularly committed. In the current environment, it is important that the European Union redoubles its efforts on making aid more effective. The Council will adopt conclusions on an operational framework on aid effectiveness. This will underline the commitments we entered into at the international meeting in Accra, where the European Union played the crucial role in achieving agreement on the Accra agenda for action. Now the Union needs to focus on practical steps to be taken by member states and the Commission in achieving this agenda. The operational framework focuses on three specific areas: division of labour, which aims to improve how member states and the Commission can complement each other and reduce the costs of how aid is provided in programme countries; use of country systems to provide aid through their Government's own systems, when possible, and to reduce separate management and reporting arrangements; and technical co-operation for enhanced capacity development whereby EU donors will aim to harmonise their approaches on technical co-operation in accordance with the Accra agenda for action, and jointly provide resources to mobilise technical expertise.

While the terminology may at times appear complex, in my visits to Ireland's programme countries, especially to Tanzania in July, I have seen for myself how we can achieve clear and effective results for the lives of the poorest people by working in co-operation with other donors on the ground and through Government and local authority systems whenever possible. Ireland has played an active role in bringing the aid effectiveness agenda to the fore at the international level and in our programme countries. I am determined that we maintain that role in preparation for the 2011 conference, in follow-up to Accra, which will be held in Seoul.

On the issue of budget support, Ministers will hold an important discussion over lunch on the provision of budget support as a way of working with developing countries. I look forward to a constructive exchange of views with a focus on how the European Union can adopt a co-ordinated approach to the issue. General budget support is the term used to describe the provision of financial assistance to a country's overall budget. It is a complex and often misunderstood area and there is a range of views on it, not just among the public, but between Governments. Funds provided as general budget support are used to support development programmes and priorities set out in a partner country's poverty reduction strategy or other national development plan and are disbursed through the recipient Government's financial management system. Clearly, this is only possible for countries with sufficiently developed systems of accountable and democratic governance. Ireland provides general budget support to only two countries — Tanzania and Mozambique. We also support the poverty action fund in Uganda, with the funds provided ring-fenced for the development of key social sectors such as education, health, water and sanitation.

Budget support allows Governments to have a greater ownership of their development agendas, not only in the planning stage, but also in terms of the long term sustainability of their development. It enables both Governments and donors to support national development as a whole, rather than focusing narrowly on the use of aid funds for individual projects or specific sectors. This is the most sustainable way of achieving long-term development in these countries. However, these funds are not given freely. They are provided on the basis of underlying agreements based on good governance, human rights and Government commitment to poverty reduction.

Providing support this way allows donors such as Ireland to influence the policy environment to deliver positive development results, a view upheld by an OECD joint evaluation of general budget support carried out in 2006. However, it is important to emphasise that budget support can never be regarded as a blank cheque. In addition to focusing on accountability arrangements, I believe that the EU has an important role to play in strengthening the policy dialogue we have with any Government to which budget support is being provided.

I would now like to speak on the issue of policy coherence for development, which will be discussed at the meeting. The Council will also examine the coherence of the European Union's overall development effort, another element in ensuring effectiveness and real results. Policy coherence for development means adopting an integrated policy approach to overseas development across Departments, to address inconsistencies between development and non-development policies and to promote synergies between these policies where possible. I chair the interdepartmental committee on development, which aims to improve the coherence of Ireland's development effort and would welcome views of committee members on how policy coherence could be enhanced in our situation.

I move on now to the issue of climate change and development. The Council will adopt conclusions on climate change and will review the preparations for the vital Copenhagen summit in December. The EU will take a leading global role in working with developing countries to enable them to respond to the climate change challenge in the medium to long term. Our discussions on Tuesday will be informed by a joint paper, prepared by the Swedish Presidency and the Commission. It underlines the importance of delivering climate change financing in an effective way, which complements development assistance.

There are two major outstanding issues to be resolved before a new global climate change deal can be reached. First is the issue of targets, with China and other emerging developing countries refusing to make firm emission reduction commitments unless developed countries take on minimum mitigation targets, in the region of 25% to 40%, below 1990 levels by 2020. Second is the issue of financing, including the cost associated with achieving national targets arising from a new global deal and the finance required to deal with climate change in developing countries. The European Union has committed to paying its fair share within a new global climate change agreement. The October 2009 European Council emphasised that it is vital that such financing should not undermine or jeopardise the fight against poverty and the continued progress towards the millennium development goals. Ireland considers that financing of climate change actions in developing countries should be adequate, reliable, predictable and delivered in an effective way that complements development assistance. As far as possible, we also agree that funding commitments arising from the current climate change negotiations should be separate and additional to existing ODA commitments.

As the Minister of State, Deputy Roche, mentioned, foreign and development Ministers will also hold a detailed discussion on democracy building in the EU external relations. I am happy to answer questions and engage in discussions on these issues.

Chairman

I thank the Minister of State. Members may raise questions with either Minister of State and they will respond as appropriate.

Deputy Billy Timmins

I thank both Ministers of State for their contributions. I will address my first question to Deputy Power. The Minister of State has received some correspondence from the deputy director of Trócaire outlining various concerns about development policy coherence. I ask for a view on that correspondence. The Minister of State referred to our commitment to a contribution of 0.7% of GNP by 2012. Will we reach that target? Are we reaffirming our commitment to reach this target by 2012?

Deputy Seán Power

The Deputy's party will be in charge at that stage.

Deputy Billy Timmins

That is a very confident prediction by Deputy Power. He is reading the straws in the wind.

Deputy Seán Power

There is not a hope.

Deputy Billy Timmins

It does not change the question. I have some issues which the Minister of State, Deputy Roche, may be able to deal with. Afghanistan is a live issue for Europe. With regard to the impact of the leaked letter from the US Ambassador in Afghanistan who is a former member of the military, he stated that the US should not send any more troops while the present regime operates as is. Will this influence Europe's policy? I refer to piracy in Somalia. Fine Gael has called for the establishment of an anti-piracy force in Somalia for the past couple of years and this force seems to be operating well. There is a Presidency proposal for a one-year mission to train the security forces of the Somali transitional federal government. What would this proposal involve?

Deputy Joe Costello

I welcome both Ministers of State and their staff. I have some questions for the Minister of State, Deputy Roche. The forthcoming GAERC meeting will deal with the implementation of the Lisbon treaty on 1 December. I ask for an update on the positions that are required to be filled, President of the European Council, an Irish Commissioner and a High Representative. Have the discussions referred to by the Taoiseach this week taken place?

The Minister of State referred to the Lisbon strategy. This strategy has not been a great success. A review of the Lisbon strategy has been knocked out of kilter by the economic crisis. The Lisbon strategy seems to be the only option for dealing with unemployment in the EU. At the last summit, the Heads of State discussed how they would withdraw from the various stimulus packages in light of recovery. However, Ireland never had a stimulus package and there is no sign of any recovery here but there are all the signs of very high unemployment. We seem to be on the periphery of the discussions. There is a danger that there could be a global improvement without the issue of unemployment being addressed to a significant extent. Would it be appropriate to propose a special summit on unemployment? It is acknowledged that unemployment will continue rise across the European Union.

It would seem the Copenhagen conference on climate change is being watered down every week. It was supposed to be a binding legal agreement and now the best we can expect is some form of political agreement. The targets seem to be going further away towards the horizon. There is no commitment to finance. This brings its own dangers which I will address with Deputy Peter Power, with regard to overseas development. What will be the cost to Ireland, considering the monumental sums of money that will be required, €100 billion by 2020 for developing countries alone, not to speak of €5 billion to €7 billion required each year from now on by the European Union? Is the impact on Ireland of this cost being included in the discussions?

The Minister of State referred briefly to the Stockholm programme on freedom and justice and it would require some further elucidation. I refer to a recent report stating there is no co-operation between the member states on the drugs issue. The member states are at odds and each country is jealously guarding and operating its own home affairs and policing approach. This means there is not a proper sharing of information. This is how it is being reported in the newspapers in the past week. If this is the information emanating from the centre of Europe, what will Ireland do about this, considering all the illegal drugs consumed in this country? What will be the Irish input?

It would be useful if the Minister for Defence could attend this committee. In the Lisbon treaty debate many people said there was a danger that "General" O'Dea could cause destruction because of all the extra powers being granted under the Lisbon treaty but this is not the case, as we know. What is Ireland's position with regard to discussions about the European Defence Agency, enhanced co-operation and the extra requirements and military capabilities? The Minister will attend the first meeting post-Lisbon treaty and these are matters of concern.

What is happening to Ireland's overseas development programme funding? Last year saw a cut of 22% and the funding is down to 0.48% so we are a long way from the 0.7% we are supposed to reach in 2012. That goalpost has been adjusted previously and now it seems to have moved to 2015, another three years. I refer to the proposals from an bord snip nua that funding be reduced to 0.39%. We are going backwards. Can it be confirmed that the 0.39% will not become the Government target and that it will stay with at least a figure of 0.48% of GNP? I refer to the concerns expressed by Concern and Trócaire that overseas development funding will become tangled up with the Copenhagen conference dealing with climate change or with the new EU external diplomatic service being established along with the new high representative and become part of the foreign policy spending? The Minister of State seems to have stated categorically that this will not be the case. I notice a very worrying caveat in his statement. He said: "As far as possible, we also agree that funding commitments arising from the current climate change negotiations should be separate and additional to existing ODA commitments". Is there any chance of deleting that and giving us a straight answer that there will be no entangling of the two so that ODA will be separate and ring-fenced so that no other Minister will have access to it for the Copenhagen conference or regarding the diplomatic services?

Deputy Noel Treacy

I warmly welcome the Ministers of State and wish them and their officials well in their busy week ahead for Ireland and the EU. It is a very important time for the Union following ratification of the Lisbon reform treaty and a time of great challenge for the Union. It is a time when the Union must renew itself and give political leadership and provide a stimulus that will help to give economic sustainability that is critical at this time.

That brings me to the Lisbon strategy, which a very strong aspiration but has not fulfilled its original idea of creating major employment across the European Union. As we face into a new Commission with the strength of a mandate given by the people as a result of the Lisbon reform treaty having been sanctioned by all the member states there is a serious need for the Union to reassert its position and look at its focus as to how it can alleviate the serious challenging unemployment, not just in Ireland, the UK or the Union generally, but all over the world. The Union must be able to give us leadership in this area when the rest of the world is in a serious crisis. We all need to have that confidence in the Union.

In the new Commission, the Commissionership for Enterprise and Industry will be particularly important. There is a need for a strong partnership between the Commissioner for Enterprise and Industry and the Commissioner for Science and Research. By having ample resources to support both those Commissionerships in future we can ensure there is a unity of purpose across the Union to help all the member states absorb the intellectual talent and skill sets that are so obvious in all the member states and particularly here in Ireland. I hope we will major on that in the next few weeks as we leave the pre-Lisbon period and move into the post-Lisbon period.

The EU-Russia summit on Wednesday, 18 November will be very important. That leads on from the Lisbon Strategy in that we need to have a solid partnership and a guaranteed energy supply that is absolutely sacrosanct. A solid deal needs to be done with no impeding or interruption of the supplies into the European Union in the next 25 or 50 years. In the solidity of the new Union we should be able to have that partnership with Russia, which would have an added advantage for the world.

I welcome what the Minister of State, Deputy Peter Power, said on overseas development aid. It is critical to have co-operation between the donors on the ground. I worry about the large number of NGOs and the huge administration and waste of money that I believe exists. I am not sure if we are getting full value for money in all the money we are giving to different NGOs in different parts of the world. It is important that people do not see this as a blank cheque. We have serious responsibility as parliamentarians. There is a serious challenge in this economy and in the resources and revenue available to Government. We need to ensure that any decisions we take are balanced, fair and equitable, but take into account the capacity of the Irish people to be able to contribute to the Exchequer and that those resources are then disbursed in the best and fairest way possible. If there is a view across the political system that taxation should be increased to meet our ODA and millennium development goals, let us establish a consensus on it and ensure that we give that clear message to the people. We need to have a reality check on the serious challenges facing all of us.

It is important that the Union can ensure in all its international negotiations on climate change it does not need to carry the can for the other major nations of the world that are reluctant to give leadership in their own regions. It is important that the Union and its member states, including Ireland, are not victims of that in the future.

Deputy Joanna Tuffy

I welcome both Ministers of State and their staff, and thank them for their presentations. Both Ministers of State raised issues relating to the development of common EU policies. The Minister of State, Deputy Roche, said "Ministers discussed developments in the Middle East, agreeing on the need to develop the EU's input into the peace process". On 6 November Ireland was one of five EU nations to support a United Nations resolution calling for investigations into the Goldstone report alleging that war crimes had been committed in Gaza. I believe 14 states abstained and six EU countries voted against the resolution. What is the position of the Minister of State regarding an EU input into the issue? It does not augur very well if the EU split in different directions on that resolution. Would it not have been better if Ireland abstained? Sweden obviously abstained and the Swedish representative was trying to achieve a compromise. Sweden holds the EU Presidency. The Palestinian representative voted one way and the Israeli representative voted another. Would it not have been better on this occasion to have abstained and to have gone along with the bulk of the EU states in that regard? Does the Minister of State agree that we should have an EU input? Surely it should follow that we should try to work together with the other EU countries when issues like this come up in the UN.

Regarding an EU policy on overseas development aid, the Minister of State, Deputy Peter Power, mentioned climate change as one of the five key areas. When talking about climate change and aid he mentioned, "including the cost associated with achieving national targets arising from a new global deal and the finance required to deal with climate change in developing countries". My take on that is that some of the aid would be for developing countries to mitigate climate change. The priority for developing countries might not be mitigating climate change. Mitigating climate change would include things like investment in renewable energy. If we are using our aid to fund projects in renewable energy, for example, are we not imposing our agenda as part of the EU and our burden regarding mitigating climate change onto developing countries, when their priorities might be the availability of food or the need for clean water? I recently attended a conference in Haifa, partly backed by the UN, about the global implications of the financial crisis on women. A large part of the debate focused on the implications for developing countries of the global crisis and whether overseas development aid would be reduced in general. Developing countries will face challenges and if we put climate change as one of the key areas there is a danger we will impose our agenda on those countries and perhaps undermining them in looking after their immediate needs like food, water, etc.

Senator Terry Leyden

I thank the Chairman and staff of the committee for organising meetings with Ministers and Ministers of State on a regular basis. I welcome the Ministers of State, Deputies Dick Roche and Peter Power, and wish them well. These two capable men will negotiate on behalf of Ireland next week. I also welcome the ambassadors and embassy staff whose presence is very important. I congratulate the Minister, Deputy Martin, and the diplomatic staff at home and abroad on their successful work in the case of Fr. Michael Sinnott. It is tremendous that he has been released unharmed. It shows the benefit of having a dynamic Department of Foreign Affairs to work on behalf of Irish citizens at home and abroad. The release of Fr. Sinnott is a great tribute to them.

I would like to speak about both of the upcoming meetings. It is important that those appointed as high commissioner and as high representative will have a role in the Middle East, particularly in light of the difficulties of the Palestinians in Gaza. We have not received the recognition we deserve for the amount of funding we provide in the Palestine region. We have not really asserted ourselves as we should, in the context of the special trade relationship we have formed with Israel. I am surprised that the matter is not on the agenda for the forthcoming meetings. The situation in the Middle East should be a regular item on the agenda. When it goes off the agenda, it is left aside for a while. The 1.5 million people in Gaza are living in an open prison. I ask the Ministers of State to highlight their cries for justice at the meeting, even though the matter is not on the agenda.

This issue relates to the capacities of both Ministers of State, as both of them are working in that particular region. This issue should be one of the greatest priorities for the EU. It is absolutely vital. When Tony Blair was sent as a representative to the Middle East, he was not respected by both sides because of his involvement in the war in Iraq. There is no point in appointing a high representative who has links with the decisions that were made in relation to the invasion of Iraq or the situation in Afghanistan. The Minister and the Government will have to bear that in mind. The previous links and policies of all prospective candidates in this regard will have to be scrutinised by the European Parliament. They must be as neutral as possible.

The position in Cyprus, as a divided nation within the EU, must be on the agenda during the discussions on the enlargement of the Union. This country's difficulties were solved, to a great extent, when the Good Friday Agreement was signed on foot of the great work of the Government of this country. I think we can be of similar assistance in the case of Cyprus. Certain people are standing by in the case of Famagusta, for example, which is the only ghost city in the EU. They are ignoring the situation in northern Cyprus. We are negotiating with Turkey, a country that invaded an independent country. This matter should be raised even though it is not on the agenda. The peace-loving people of Cyprus have been afflicted with a massive attack. I suggest that the British could consider withdrawing from Cyprus as well. They have a massive involvement across 30 square acres. It is like an independent little republic within Cyprus. They have the best land, so they should consider their position as well.

I have mentioned some of the issues the Ministers of State could raise. I hope the Minister of State, Deputy Peter Power, feels that his section of the Department of Foreign Affairs is bedding in well in Limerick. I think that aspect of decentralisation has worked well and has been a success. His appointment to his current position must have helped the Department's involvement there.

Our record of contributing 0.48% of GNP as aid to Third World countries is a proud one. The work and expenditure of Irish voluntary organisations should also be borne in mind. Fr. Michael Sinnott's religious order and all the other orders have done great work over the years. The funds going from Ireland in addition to Government aid should be calculated too. We have a proud record in this regard. We do not get recognition for the contributions made by Concern, Goal, Trócaire and other agencies and religious orders that have an enormous involvement in the Third World. The contribution we are making in difficult times should be borne in mind. I wish the Minister of State well in his difficult task in that region. I wish both Ministers of State well in their work next week.

Deputy Beverley Flynn

I welcome the Ministers of State and their officials and wish them every success in next week's negotiations. I assure the Minister of State, Deputy Peter Power, that I acknowledge how well Ireland is doing, by comparison to its EU and international counterparts, in terms of the money it is providing as overseas development aid. It is important, particularly during the times we are in, that the best value for our money is achieved. In practical terms, what are we doing to ensure our aid money is working better? Perhaps the Ministers of State can outline how they see that happening. Are we getting the best value for the money we are allocating?

The Minister, Deputy Micheál Martin, appeared before this committee a number of months ago, at a time when Governments, as a result of the economic crisis, were unfortunately having to reduce the amount of money they were giving to overseas development aid. I asked the Minister whether anything was being done at EU level to get some sort of the social dividend from the banking community and ensure that it plays some part in boosting this sector. As Governments are finding it difficult to come up with money, perhaps the banks can participate in some way. The Minister said at the time that he would raise my suggestion at a meeting. I wonder if anything ever happened in that regard. Was any progress ever made? Ireland, like most countries, is in this situation as a result of many of the activities of the banking community. When things improve for us all internationally, it would be nice if the banks were to do something in respect of overseas development aid.

Two countries where we provide general budget support, Tanzania and Mozambique, have been mentioned. What type of feedback has been received in that regard? The Department's submission states that we want to strengthen policy dialogue with countries where we provide general budget support. Can the Ministers of State outline how we can follow that up? How can we get feedback on how the money is being spent and thereby ensure it is being spent in a manner we would like?

I would like to ask the Minister of State, Deputy Dick Roche, what proposals he intends to bring to the table on behalf of Ireland in relation to the post-Lisbon strategy and in terms of dealing with our competitiveness with Asia. What specific proposals will he bring to the table on behalf of Ireland at the meeting?

Deputy Thomas Byrne

I join Senator Leyden in complementing the efforts of the Department of Foreign Affairs in the case of Fr. Michael Sinnott. The Colombans in my constituency, like many others, are very pleased with the efforts the Department made. Their gratitude was broadcast again on local radio this morning. The manner in which this case was resolved shows the importance of having a wide network of diplomats around the world. Like Senator Leyden, I welcome the diplomatic staff and diplomats who are present and thank them for their ongoing interest in the work of this committee.

EU security and defence policy is a hobby horse of mine. As part of the review of what is going on in that regard, there will be a declaration of ten years of security and defence policy at European level. I would like the Government to emphasise the civilian aspects of that policy, which are never emphasised. Judicial and other missions are never mentioned as part of the framework. It is important that the civilian aspects of it are outlined.

It is important that this country's position in the overseas development aid world rankings is constantly noted. We are sixth in the world and fifth in the EU. We have made a huge contribution to overseas development aid, although it is not as much as we would like. There is no question that it is a huge contribution out of our budget. I emphasise that it is never wrong to review any aspect of spending to ascertain whether we are getting the best value for money. I encourage the Minister to do that.

Some criticism of Irish Aid was made today by Mr. Niall Mellon when he described certain inefficiencies in the organisation. He specifically said that the new centre for volunteerism is not helping his organisation. He said that over half of overseas volunteers in this country are from his organisation. They do great work. I ask the Minister, when he is here, to comment on those complaints.

Deputy Seán Power

It is nice to see the Gallery full for this important meeting. I hope our visitors were comfortable, although the Gallery appeared to be a little crowded at times. I welcome the Ministers of State. Two Irishmen, who have been working on behalf of all European Union citizens, are completing or have just completed their terms of office. Mr. John Bruton, who was doing important work in the United States, has concluded his term, while Mr. Charlie McCreevy's term as Commissioner will shortly conclude. It would be appropriate for the joint committee to express its appreciation to both men for the important work they have done on behalf of Ireland and the European Union over the past five years.

The Minister of State, Deputy Dick Roche, indicated that the Council is expected to discuss the establishment of a new European asylum support office. What can we expect from the establishment of this office? Will the Minister of State outline the current position as regards asylum seekers in Ireland and throughout the European Union? Is the number of asylum seekers in decline and, if so, to what extent? Is the Minister of State satisfied that there is uniformity among European Union member states on how they deal with those who seek asylum?

I am conscious of the important work done by non-governmental organisations. I ask the Minister of State, Deputy Peter Power, to outline the criteria used in working with NGOs. Ireland has proved that it is a generous contributor to development both in financial and personnel terms. Many small NGOs have grown in size and now do important work overseas. The proportion of the overall budget some of these groups use for administration purposes is a matter of concern. People give to charities for good reasons and do not ask many questions. Would it be helpful to publish on a regular basis details of the costs incurred by such organisations and the amounts expended on administration as opposed to addressing the particular issue for which they were established?

The forthcoming General Affairs and External Relations Council meeting has an extensive agenda and I wish both Ministers of State well in their endeavours.

Senator Paschal Donohoe

I welcome the Ministers of State. A consistent theme of previous briefings given by the Minister of State, Deputy Dick Roche, has been the latest position of accession negotiations with Iceland. I note such an update was not provided today. Will the Minister of State outline the up to date position?

Newspaper reports today indicate that the Swedish Prime Minister has stated it may not be possible to reach a consensus on the candidates for several key European Union jobs. Is there a danger that Europe will drop the ball at a time when we should be preoccupied with the unemployment crisis, with 23 million people unemployed in Europe, the approaching Copenhagen conference and the requirement to find a means to renew or replace the Lisbon strategy? Europe should be able to reach agreement on who should do these jobs and the forthcoming Council meeting affords an opportunity to discuss this matter. Will the Minister of State provide an update of our views on whether it will be possible to achieve consensus on the candidates and how agreement will be achieved?

Chairman

The Ministers of State have been asked a wide range of questions. I will focus on one or two issues of special interest to the joint committee. Bosnia-Herzegovina is an issue that has been noted in the joint committee's interim report. The full report is not yet complete. The general thrust of the joint committee's views on this matter is that it is vital that EUFOR and all bodies and agencies from outside the region remain in situ and continue to be involved in a positive, hands-on manner. Withdrawal from the region at this critical time could cause problems. This applies to all emerging democracies because the danger in times of economic crisis is that the liberal approach to reducing budgets can have tragic consequences. Great care must be exercised in this regard.

One cannot overstate the importance at this juncture of showing leadership in the European Union. The persons appointed to positions in the Commission, Council and other institutions must be of the highest possible calibre and have the greatest possible political vision and competence. Failure to appoint such persons will be viewed both inside and outside the European Union as reflecting a could not care less attitude. Such a perception must be avoided at all costs.

The Minister of State will be pleased to learn that I have tabled a number of parliamentary questions on the next issue I raise. One cannot overstate the urgency with which political leadership, vision, competence and capability are required. Each Commissioner appointed must recognise that he or she has responsibility to all member states, not only the state which appointed him or her. I know this will be borne in mind but now is not the time for cosmetics. Serious decisions must be taken because they will have far-reaching impact.

I welcome the initiatives on piracy which takes many forms. There is a shift from speculating in the financial markets to speculating in commodities, which can have serious, negative consequences for poor countries and all economies. The European Union should take all possible steps to address this issue, particularly in the area of energy. Speculation in the energy market has been rife for the past five or ten years. The significant fluctuations in the price of oil, for instance, were the result of speculation. It does not add up that oil prices increased when the global economy was in decline. When interests rates are low, people who have access to funds engage in large-scale speculation which they use to their benefit and to the exclusion of others.

I note the European Union's discussions with Russia and Ukraine. These issues feature in the work programme of the joint committee. While we have some unfinished business in this regard, we are glad to be able to report and will support the thrust of what the Minister of State will do in the forthcoming meetings.

Deputy Dick Roche

As the Chairman noted, a comprehensive range of questions has been asked. Deputy Timmins asked about a leaked letter on Afghanistan and the issue of United States soldiers. While this is a US domestic issue, it touches on a point I made yesterday in a Dáil debate, one which was also raised by Deputy Costello and others. It is critical that the new administration in Afghanistan moves beyond the current phase if the international community is to be supportive. Corruption must be dealt with and a functioning government system put in place. Otherwise, people who are making sacrifices in countries which are contributing troops and in the wider sense in the rest of the international community would have to ask what is going on. The reality is there is a big challenge to the Afghan people to take possession of their own governance and put in place a system of governance that would be worthy of support and, in particular, to move beyond corruption and tribalism.

Deputy Timmins also referred to the issue of Somali pirates and the training that would be put in place, in particular the support that would be given to the Somali transition federal forces. The discussions will be on a tentative basis but it is clear that capacity building will be critical if this matter is to be put back where it belongs with the local government and people.

Deputy Costello touched on a number of issues. First, the Lisbon treaty is not on the agenda. Thankfully, all the instruments of ratification will have been lodged by Friday, 13 November, which is a date that always strikes me as having doom-laden overtures. The Lisbon treaty was signed on Friday 13th as well. I hope we are not tempting fate.

Several members inquired about the post-Lisbon treaty positions. It is important to take the point that the Chairman made, namely, that leadership of the European Union be established, but that the people of the highest calibre, competence and experience would be appointed to the positions, especially those of High Representative and President of the Council. This should not be a game that is played out between different groups.

The most important aspect of filling both of those positions is first to ask the question of what is needed. The debate has been ongoing, rather late in the day, about the Presidency of the Council, and whether it should be a chairman or chief. We dealt with that. Deputy Costello who asked the question would be aware that this was a concern of the Irish delegation in the Convention on the Future of Europe. We argued strongly that before one put a label on the new post, one needed to know what one wanted from the post. We suggested that a better title might have been secretary general, as is the case, for example, in the United Nations. That view was not universally shared or enthusiastically accepted by other member states. It is late in the day. That debate is ongoing.

It is critical that, in particular, with the appointment of the presidency of the Council that we are conscious of what it was that we wanted to solve. The secondary question was always who does the United States Secretary of State ring, but the primary question from Europe's point of view has got to be who will deal with Europe. We must ensure the European Union does its business in a coherent, comprehensive way so there is continuity and the agendas are set and carried. Perhaps that is a less glamorous post than being president of the whole of Europe, but that is the view that was commonly shared as we came out of the Convention on the Future of Europe and the IGC.

Several members inquired about how the person will be chosen. The optimum way of choosing that person would be by the conventional way, by consensus. It is much better to have it done by consensus than it would be to have a vote. If we have a vote, I hope it will not simply be a case of the big families of Europe seeking to carve issues up between themselves, namely, the EPP, the socialists or the ELDR. I hope there will be a consciousness that people who may come from smaller countries or groups might have particular and specific qualities. The Taoiseach made that point yesterday.

There has been less debate on the high representative position than there has on the presidency of the Council. The latter became something akin to a glamour contest for a while. It is critically important from the point of view of Europe and the evolution of Europe's relationship with the rest of the world that careful thought be given to who we choose. It must be not just a person with experience and competence. It goes without saying that the person who is chosen should have both, but also the person should have a track record and previous experience that will not put that man or woman off-base with large sections of the world. That was inferred in Senator Donohoe's question. That is critically important. We need to have dialogue with communities, not just in the Middle East but right across the globe.

It will be very important that the person who will fulfil either of those two jobs will be capable of doing those jobs. It will go without saying that people of competence, experience and political experience will be chosen, but there also has to be a very nuanced approach to the choice, given their previous experience. Olli Rehn's name has been mentioned today. That is not just because he is a member of the ELDR but that particular group seems to have been factored out of any of the discussions to date. He has done an astonishingly good job and he has the capacity, coming as he does from a small country without axes to grind, to represent all of our views in Europe, not just the views of the larger countries but the views of the smaller countries as well.

Deputy Seán Power referred to John Bruton and Charlie McCreevy. We all wish both men well, because in their own way they have served this country well but, more importantly, in their most recent appointments both of them have served Europe well. That is why the Taoiseach said that in the event of, for example, John Bruton getting support from within his own EPP family, he has many of the qualities that are specifically needed to fulfil the job. We should get away from the ridiculous and childish beauty contest as to who will fill those positions. We should be considering people who have the competence, capacity and political experience to fulfil the jobs, but not only that, the capacity to stamp a seal on how the jobs are done.

In the case of the President of the Council it is critical that we do not get a prima donna, a star performer, but that we get someone who has the capacity to bring Europe along. That was the image we sought in the convention, that the European presidency would have the continuity and the capacity to move the European agenda along, and if there were other benefits such as answering the telephone to the Secretary of State of the United States, that would be great, but that was not the primary focus.

Deputy Seán Power

Was that the same criteria that we had for choosing our Chairman?

Deputy Dick Roche

Absolutely. The Deputy took the words right out of my mouth.

Deputy Costello also raised the issue of the stimulus packages, as did Deputies Treacy, Flynn, the Chairman and several other speakers. They tied it in with the Lisbon Agenda. As I indicated in the Dáil yesterday, there has to be an exit strategy from the stimulus packages because they cannot be completed. I take issue with the view that this country does not have a stimulus package, given that we have the highest public investment programme, proportionately, in the Union. Notwithstanding our current situation we have a stimulus package but it is focused on national development. Deputy Costello is correct that where there are stimulus packages there has to be careful consideration. He made that point yesterday in the Dáil and I made this point in response to him. There is a challenge, for example, in the United States, to maintain the jobs that have been created under the domestic stimulus package as the funding reduces. That is a challenge for the US Administration and for the administrations in Europe. A stimulus package in the traditional sense is a double-edged sword in the case of this country, given the extraordinary openness of our economy.

Several members raised the issue of the Copenhagen conference. The prospects of final agreement in Copenhagen look grim at this stage. I hope that is not the case but the assessment of the media in recent days is that it will take longer to reach agreement. The point was also made yesterday in the Dáil and today by several contributors about what will be the cost of the climate change package in Europe. I will leave the Minister of State, Deputy Peter Power, to deal with the development aid aspects of it. The cost is being put at approximately €100 billion, a phenomenal amount. A rough calculation by the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government is that by 2020 that could be €180 million in Irish terms. It will depend ultimately on what targets are achieved. The European targets are dependent on the rest of the world carrying its burden. I agree with the point made by Deputies Treacy, Flynn and Tuffy, that there is no way Europe can carry the full burden. We cannot pauperise Europe to deal with the profligacy of some parts of the world. There has to be a coherent response.

Deputy Costello made the point on freedom and justice that member states are not co-operating on the drugs area. I do not think the recent cigarette haul, which was an example of extraordinary co-operation across a variety of agencies and nations, or the drug seizure off the Irish coast support that theory. However, I accept there is room for improvement. Deputy Costello is correct that intelligence gathered by various agencies within member states is guarded jealously. The last thing they want to do is to read about what they are doing in the Greek equivalent of the Evening Herald.

It was mentioned that the Minister, Deputy O'Dea, is not here and if he wants to conquer the world——

Chairman

His heart is in it.

Deputy Dick Roche

The only conquest that he ever wants is to gain the hearts, the minds and not least the votes of the people of Limerick. That objective is shared by the Minister of State, Deputy Peter Power.

Deputy Treacy touched on the Lisbon strategy. He made the point about the intellectual focus. There was a subscript in his general point. The Lisbon strategy was too broad based. There is an old criteria in business that if one is to make a plan, it has to be finite and set out in quantifiable terms of achievement. There was far too much loose language in the Lisbon strategy, and there needs to be more specific language in its place. Intellectual capacity and alternative energy are areas we should examine.

We also need to be very careful. We must examine and learn from the experience of the recent crash in worldwide financial services. There is no doubt whatsoever that banking cannot go back to the same old crooked, fraudulent ways. Banking will have to be better regulated, and one of the things Europe could do would be to introduce appropriate regulation.

Deputy Tuffy spoke about the Goldstein report, but I disagree with her. I think we made the right decision to support the resolution. The resolution is not the end of the process. This is very much a first step. The two sides must come up with credible responses. There is a moral responsibility on both sides to conduct independent investigations into the allegations that have been made. I was distressed at the willingness of some powerful nations to dismiss the Goldstein report. If there is to be a settlement in the Middle East, we have to accept the hard truths. The hard truth is that things happen there that are wrong. It is wrong, irrespective of the other considerations, that the people of Palestine should effectively feel themselves to be in the world's biggest open prison.

Deputy Joanna Tuffy

I am sorry for interrupting, but my question was whether we should be trying to have a common approach. Fourteen EU countries abstained.

Deputy Dick Roche

I do not disagree with the Deputy, but when it comes to a vote on a specific resolution, we have to take our approach on it. It would be much better if there was a common approach, and I think the Swedish Presidency made a strenuous effort to get that. The Swedish Presidency has been excellent. Ireland operates in the friends of the Presidency group and it has done really good work.

Senator Leyden made the point about Fr. Sinnott and the work of the Department of Foreign Affairs. In these days when we have to seek economies, it is critically important that those services which are our strengths are not affected. We have to be very nuanced in our approach to that.

Deputy Seán Power raised the issue of the asylum support office and he is correct that there is a wide range of approaches. There is also a wide range of effects. I have spoken to my Maltese counterpart, and they have a terrible problem there, as they do in Greece, Spain, Cyprus and Italy. The office will be of considerable assistance in building on the experience of the different member states, but I would be misleading the committee if I suggested that we have reached finality in the way this will operate. The point is well made, but perhaps we could come back to it on another occasion.

Deputy Byrne spoke about ESDP. There is a particular paragraph on ESDP which states:

We pledge to continue to improve our capacity to provide national and multinational capacities for the European Union's missions and operations. The growth of ESDP calls for increased availability of civilians and military personnel and equipment.

Deputy Byrne's point was that we should grow the civilian side. He is right and that is recognised.

Senator Donohoe raised the issue of Iceland, but it is not on the agenda. An avis has to come back on that country. The Senator also spoke about the two senior EU jobs. He is right in that it would be better if there was a consensus. It would not be great if we went to a vote by QMV. There will be a special meeting at Heads of Government level about this in the next week, and we hope that issues will be resolved there. It is time for all the shadow boxing to end and for the candidates to come forward. During the convention and again at the IGC, we were toying with ways that these particular jobs would be filled. Maybe now is the time for Europe to start looking at them. There was an idea that the candidate going forward for the position of President should be nominated by five governments, and that the candidates would go from member state parliament to member state parliament to make a brief presentation. It would engage the people in the debate as to who ultimately fills these high positions and would give parliaments real say. That opportunity was not grasped, perhaps because the thinking we had at the time was a little advanced. John Bruton and I spent an entire night trying to work out something. Perhaps it might happen in the future.

Chairman, you mentioned the issue of Bosnia-Herzegovina. I think you are right. Capacity needs to be built up in that country, but while that is happening, there can be no withdrawal. Your final comments are also right. The team that is appointed to the Commission and to the two new high posts have to play for Europe. Parochialism and individual member state concerns have to be put to one side. That is not to say that the person we send to the Commission should entirely forget where he or she comes from.

Senator Terry Leyden

The Minister of State did not speak about Cyprus and the position on Turkey's application for membership of the European Union.

Deputy Dick Roche

It is not on the agenda. The Turkish application has to be handled against objective criteria. There is a whole series of objective criteria being set down under the Copenhagen criteria. We expect to deal with enlargement in the December General Affairs and External Relations Council. That will include the Commission's annual report on the enlargement process, including the Turkish application and any issues that arise in respect of Cyprus.

Cyprus is very well represented at the General Affairs and External Relations Council by a very able Minister, who is never shy or retiring when it comes to explaining the concerns of the people on a divided island, something with which we have a great sympathy.

Deputy Noel Treacy

It is critically important that no country outside the Union should be considered for membership of the EU unless it accepts the full integrity and sovereignty of the Union and of each member state. It is important that the EU strengthens its position on this. There are many other countries that want to join, and that recognition of the Union and its component states is vital to ensure that law and order, respect and mutual consensus can be achieved.

Deputy Dick Roche

It is worth recalling that there were issues on this island in 1972 when the Irish people took the courageous decision to join the EEC without resolving issues that were in the hearts of many people in this island. Membership of the European Union has helped to normalise the relationship in an extraordinary way. It is one of the great successes of the EU. It is sad that all the good things that were achieved were discounted by some during the recent referendum.

Eaten bread is soon forgotten. One of our great achievements on this island is the normalisation of relationships between communities which only a few years ago were hell-bent on mutual self-destruction. As John Hume observed, Europe has been the greatest example of a peace process in the history of humankind. That must never be forgotten; having gained that enormous prize, we must ensure we do not discount it. We have seen the miracle of the realisation of Schuman's vision that war among Europeans would be made not only morally repugnant but materially impossible by the pooling of small amounts of sovereignty to create a greater whole, the synergy of the 27 member states coming together being more effective than individual nations working their own case. Sadly, however, that is one of the extraordinary achievements of the European project which we in Ireland — and in Europe in general — all too frequently forget. If we forget our history, we are condemned to repeat it.

Chairman

I thank the Minister of State, Deputy Roche. I now invite the Minister of State, Deputy Peter Power, to respond. He has a broad range of subjects to deal with. Particular reference was made to development aid and budget support. Members are concerned to ensure there is no hijacking in that area in terms of local or institutional corruption in the states concerned.

Deputy Peter Power

I echo the fine thoughts articulated by the Minister of State, Deputy Roche. He has held his position for many years and has a fabulous perspective on the benefits of the entire European project. I agree with everything he said in that respect. I understand he holds the distinction of being the only Minister in Europe who remains in office since the beginning of the Lisbon treaty process.

Senator Terry Leyden

Perhaps he should be appointed President of the European Council.

Chairman

The Government cannot afford to have a by-election in Wicklow.

Deputy Peter Power

In the interests of brevity I propose to focus on five issues that were common to all the contributions, namely, levels of overseas development aid, climate change, policy coherence across Europe, general budget support and issues in regard to non-governmental organisations and civil society.

Before dealing with these five broad issues, I take this opportunity to note that the European Union as a collective entity is by far the greatest global actor in terms of development. As a union of peoples, it is an incredible force for good. By pooling our resources and channelling them through one entity, member states can achieve much more on the global stage than any one of them could ever achieve individually. It is important that this discussion is taking place in advance of the Council meeting. I assure members that their views will feed into our thinking and policy positions at that meeting.

Deputies Costello, Timmins and Tuffy referred to the reductions we have had to make to our ODA contribution. It is important to emphasise that those decisions were made in the context of our attempt collectively, right across Government, to stabilise the public finances. It is simply not feasible to have an expanding overseas aid and development programme in the context of unsustainable public finances. However, members should bear in mind that our decision in this regard was taken alongside a very firm commitment to resume growth in our aid programme as soon as we return to economic growth. Throughout the last decade we increased aid and development at a rate greater than our economic development. It is important to reiterate that at the outset.

Deputy Costello spoke about our capacity to reach our ODA target, which is expressed as a percentage of GNP, and we talked about predictability into the future. Given that our GNP is in such an unpredictable place, with indicators varying from month to month, it is almost impossible to forecast what the figure will be at the end of this year, much less in years to come. Therefore, we are dealing with a moving target in respect of which it is difficult to be definitive. Having said that, the Government remains committed to reaching our target and we will continue to work towards it. An assessment of our capacity to reach the target three years earlier than most other countries in the European Union, that is, by 2012, will have to be formulated in the context of the budget discussions that are currently ongoing. However, we are making the strongest possible case to progress our budget within the parameters I outlined at the outset.

Notwithstanding the difficult and painful decisions we have had to make in regard to our ODA budget, Ireland remains, as has been pointed out, the sixth most generous donor in per capita terms in the world, ahead of such countries as the United Kingdom at 0.43%, Spain at 0.43%, France at 0.39%, Germany at 0.38%, and Italy at 0.2%. These are large economies which are better able to absorb the shocks resulting from the international financial crisis. When one considers the problems we face, maintaining our contribution at approximately 0.5% represents a very significant achievement. The priority for now is to ensure that the allocation we can make goes much further and is disbursed as effectively as possible. The Secretary General of the OECD commented in the course of discussions with me last week that Ireland is a champion of making aid more effective. In other words, we achieve better results for our aid than most other countries.

In regard to climate change, Deputies Costello, Tuffy and Timmins made important contributions. The reality is that the developing world is likely to suffer more as a result of climate change than the rich countries of the developed world ever will because developing countries simply do not have the capacity to deal with the impact of that change. It is ironic that while they did not cause climate change, it is poor countries that will suffer most as a result of it. Therefore, the Copenhagen process and climate change agenda must incorporate a development dimension. That brings forward the twin issues of adaptation and mitigation, both of which are difficult for developing countries because of their lack of capacity in that regard. That is why there must be significant transfers from north to south in terms of the overall climate change agenda. That issue was specifically raised by Deputy Tuffy in regard to additionality.

Deputy Costello asked whether there will be a muddying of the waters in respect of ODA and climate change adaptation. The reality is that climate change is already an important issue on the ground in developing countries. Visiting Ethiopia earlier this year, I met farmers who although they did not have third level degrees or training from Teagasc, knew in their hearts and in their blood that climate change was already affecting them. For example, desertification is an issue of significant concern, as is the unpredictability of the rains. Farmers know something is happening but they are unable to cope with the changes. As a result, approximately €50 million of our overall aid budget this year is allocated towards climate change activities, including, for instance, technical support to governments to implement their own national plans in order to adapt to the challenges they face.

In Ethiopia our safety net programme provides many millions of euro to help more than 7 million Ethiopians. This provides food and cash in exchange for works on climate change projects. One simple project that I noted involved an area high in the mountains where unpredictable rains wash away the soil. People are creating micro-dams and micro-irrigation projects to stop the rain rushing off the mountains. This makes their soil more productive and helps counter one of the effects of climate change. We are also investing in research on global crop diversity. This is a real issue in the context of climate change. We are investing heavily in research on ensuring seeds and agricultural inputs create more effective and productive crops in the years ahead. Deputy Tuffy's comments were well made.

Regarding policy coherence for development across the EU, we must ensure we are not taking action that will affect the developing world. A concrete example of this important point is trade. At the world trade talks, are we adopting a position that prejudices or affects our development ambitions on the other side? Are we taking stances that will make developing countries unable to trade their way out of poverty? We must allow countries in the developing south to trade their way out of poverty in the same way Ireland traded its way out of difficulty by increasing its economic capacity. I accept that one cannot make the analogy directly. We are making constant strides to ensure coherence across the EU.

The effectiveness of NGOs and value for money was raised by Deputy Seán Power, Senator Leyden and Deputy Thomas Byrne. We are engaged in the value for money agenda with our NGO partners. It is not widely known that, through our aid budget, we contribute more than €150 million directly to the organisations referred to such as Concern, GOAL, Christian Aid and hundreds of other organisations. As legislators, we have a real responsibility to ensure that taxpayers' money, which is channelled through these organisations, is spent effectively and wisely and not just because of our current circumstances. We are engaged in intense conversation with the NGO community to ensure the money is spent effectively and in an accountable fashion.

Deputy Thomas Byrne referred specifically to criticisms of Irish Aid in today's media by the Niall Mellon Township Trust. It was raised specifically, even though we are dealing with the forthcoming GAERC meeting. I cannot accept the criticism by the Niall Mellon Township Trust about Irish Aid officials and Irish civil servants because the programme we shaped as a world-class, cutting-edge effective programme was lauded by the OECD as an effective and results driven programme. I met the secretary general of the OECD last week and he said the Irish Aid programme and its officials are working to the very highest standards of aid effectiveness in the world. The criticism was unfounded and disappointing. We insist on full accountability of taxpayers' money. Last year, we gave €5 million to the Niall Mellon Township Trust, a significant amount of money, and we are still waiting for financial reports on how that money was accounted for. That is an ongoing issue that I intend to pursue vigorously.

Another point was made by Deputy Flynn about general budget support. We give general budget support because we believe the best way to channel money to countries with a highly developed sense of good corporate governance and financial accountability in the government, such as Mozambique and Tanzania, is through government assistance, almost in the same way the EU channelled money to our Government in the 1970s and 1980s. This allowed Ireland to take charge of its development plans and increased our capacity to develop infrastructure. This was not done by building schools, roads, hospitals, clinics and by helping in agriculture directly but by giving money to the Government to deliver the national programme. In the long run, that is the only sustainable way for countries to sustain development. It is an important point and we are leading the way in the countries to which Deputy Flynn referred.

The Chairman mentioned the important point of speculative trading, particularly in Africa. One of the worst aspects of the development agenda is the chronic poverty in many countries in Africa in areas that are incredibly rich in natural resources such as ores, minerals and major deposits of oil in recent years. Whether it is a good or a bad idea to tap into them is a separate issue but major resources exist in such countries and they should be allowed to develop these resources. Rich countries from the developed north go in there to tap into the resources to benefit the rich economies in the north. This can potentially undermine the ability of these countries to develop their economies and resources for the benefit of the poor people in the countries. Speculative trading is a major part of this. Buying short and selling high is immoral. I thank the Chairman for the opportunity to address the committee.

Deputy Joanna Tuffy

The Minister of State suggested developing countries do not have the capacity to deal with the impact of climate change. They do not have the capacity because they are poor. The issue is to deal with the fact that they are poor. I am worried that the issue of climate change takes over and we examine the matter from our perspective. If we deal with poverty in developing countries they will have the capacity to deal with climate change. However, if we concentrate on climate change, we endanger the work done on poverty. Poverty should be the priority and out of that, countries would be better able to deal with climate change.

Deputy Peter Power

It is a fair point. We cannot dictate. We may be obsessed with climate change and we cannot impose that agenda on the developing south. While that is one aspect of the matter, climate change has the capacity to completely undermine the entire global aid and development effort. These countries will be affected more. Most of the 6 billion people on the planet live in the developing south. We cannot feed them at the moment because agricultural production does not have the capacity to feed them. The population will increase from 6 billion to 9 billion in the context where climate change will undermine their capacity to feed themselves. We must deal with this issue not just because we must deal with climate change but because if we do not enable developing countries to adapt and mitigate the effects of climate change, they will not be able to feed themselves in the next 20 or 30 years. It is a major issue.

Deputy Joanna Tuffy

The way to enable countries to deal with climate change is to deal with poverty. Giving these people greater capacity through the usual overseas aid work we do will help them deal with climate change better. One follows the other. Dealing with the poverty issue is the way to deal with climate change. Research shows that the more income equality there is within countries, the more they do to mitigate climate change. Our focus should be on poverty and equality, and climate change mitigation adaption will arise out of that rather than the other way around.

Deputy Joe Costello

I echo the points made by Deputy Tuffy. The danger is that the climate change budget will be colossal. The figure given by the EU at the previous meeting of the Heads of State was €100 billion for developing countries alone. There would definitely be a temptation to use some of the overseas development money. There is a grey area where €50 million of Irish overseas development aid is being expended on a climate change type project, and there is a danger that much money could be siphoned in that direction. The boundary lines need to be more clearly drawn. The existing ring-fenced money for projects and activities on poverty and existing issues should remain and we should consider the climate change project as a separate entity.

There will always be overlaps but if the Minister of State does not draw boundary lines, the overseas development aid budget will be sucked into the climate change budget very quickly and it will be a drop in the sea compared to the overall demands of the climate change budget. More and more of the money will be used on climate change. Ireland has a tremendous record in dealing with overseas development aid. As an Irish representative, could the Minister of State try to ring-fence overseas development aid activity without getting it subsumed into the climate change budget, no matter how attractive it might seem to do so and no matter how related some climate change issues are to eliminating poverty and creating equality?

Senator Paschal Donohoe

My colleagues are making me think about this area and I would be interested in the Minister of State's response to a question. Deputy Tuffy mentioned €100 billion. I noticed that at the conference there was agreement on the amount of money but, notably, there was no agreement on from where the money would come. Is there an opportunity to spend overseas aid in a way that would build the capacity for the changes needed in the developing world to help it cope with the effects of climate change and dealing with it? I am very conscious of what will happen in our economy and other European economies. It would be awful to have a commitment for €100 billion and not be able to find the money. Is there any way in which the money being spent on overseas aid could be used in a more creative manner so that we try to address two agendas? I understand the need to maintain the funding but we must ensure that money is spent and we do not have a nightmare scenario of not spending money, or not spending enough money in this area.

Deputy Peter Power

I should apologise to Deputy Costello because I did not answer his question directly. I do not disagree with what he stated. Our position is that any financing for the mitigation of climate change in developing countries should be additional to overseas development aid. In his initial contribution, Deputy Costello was concerned about the words "as far as possible" and in my attempt to deal with that small issue I forgot to clearly state that our fundamental position and policy is that it should be in addition. The reason the phrase "as far as possible" is used is that the money invested in overseas development aid on matters such as research and seeds is purely overseas development aid. However, it relates to climate change issues. At the council meeting next week we will state that the Government's fundamental position is that it should be additional and that this should be the common position of the European Union. I hope this response deals with Senator Donohoe's question also.

The figure of €100 billion is an estimate which varies and is a global rather than a European figure. It also relates to environment matters. The ECOFIN Ministers could not come to a substantive agreement on levels or on the manner in which it should be apportioned between individual European countries. Dealing with those issues is now going way above my level to the level of Heads of Government and hard negotiations in Copenhagen. It appears to be the big stumbling block preventing agreement in Copenhagen.

Chairman

I thank the Ministers of State and their officials for coming before the committee. The Minister for Defence, Deputy Willie O'Dea, hoped to be here today and will attend a meeting on the next possible occasion. It was difficult to arrange the availability of all Ministers and Ministers of State at the same time. I compliment the Ministers of State on their willingness and readiness at all times to attend committee meetings. I emphasise that not all Ministers and Ministers of State readily make themselves available but some regularly do and they should be acknowledged.

The committee will now meet in private session.

The joint committee went into private session at 1.40 p.m. and adjourned at 1.50 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. on Tuesday, 17 November 2009.