JOINT COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 17 Dec 2008

Hunger Task Force Report: Discussion.

Chairman

Before we commence I advise witnesses that whereas Members of the Houses enjoy absolute privilege in respect of utterances made in committee, witnesses do not enjoy absolute privilege. The former Minister, Mr. Joe Walsh, should bear that in mind. Accordingly, caution should be exercised, especially with regard to references of a personal nature.

I welcome all witnesses to the meeting. I welcome, in particular, our former colleague, Mr. Joe Walsh, chairman of the hunger task force. He is very welcome back. I welcome also Mr. Tom Arnold, who is well known to all of us as chief executive of Concern Worldwide, Professor Denis Lucey, chairman of Gorta, and Mr. Brendan McMahon, secretary to the hunger task force.

We have a strong team here. Members will realise the committee is broadly based. It includes: Ms Nancy Aburi, a development communications specialist, who is working in Nairobi; Dr. Pamela K. Anderson who is director general of the International Potato Centre in Lima, Peru; I referred to Dr. Tom Arnold; Bono, U2's lead singer and activist whom we all know very well, and has put a great deal of work into this area; Mr. Kevin Farrell is director of the World Food Programme in Zimbabwe; Professor Michael Gibney, professor of food and health in the college of life sciences in UCD; Professor Laurence Haddad, director of the UK Institute of Development Studies; Mr. Justin Kilcullen director of Trócaire; Professor Lucey is here with us also; Mr. Aidan O'Driscoll, Assistant Secretary General, Department of Agriculture and Food; Professor Jeffrey Sachs from Columbia University is director of the Earth Institute and has played a big part in development aid; Ms Josette Sheeran, is executive director of the World Food Programme; and Ms Sheila Sisulu is from the UN World Food Programme. As members can see, a distinguished body of people have been working on the matter for some time. In addition to welcoming the team members who are present I thank also the other members of the task force for the work they did.

Since its launch in the headquarters of the United Nations in New York in September, the hunger task force report has been praised widely. Today we will have an opportunity to discuss the genesis of the report and its key recommendations with a number of authors. The committee has a deep and enduring interest in Ireland's development aid policy and programmes. Members of the committee visited Israel, Palestine, Uganda and Malawi during the course of 2008. We have seen at first hand the effects of extreme poverty and hunger. We are keenly aware of the plurality of needs in the world's least developed countries. We are interested to hear from the members of the task force how their recommendations, when implemented, will have a real and lasting effect in addressing those needs and in particular in bringing food security to approximately 1 billion women and children who are hungry today. I invite the chairman of the hunger task force, Mr. Joe Walsh, to address the committee on the task force report to the Government.

Mr. Joe Walsh

I thank the Chairman. I am delighted to be before the committee today, especially among former colleagues. I welcome the new members of this important committee. We appreciate the attendance of members to hear a presentation on the task force report.

As members know, the establishment of the task force was one of the key recommendations of the White Paper on development aid. It was set up last year to report on the particular contribution Ireland can make in tackling the root causes of hunger, especially in Africa.

As the Chairman indicated, with the exception of the chairman it was a very distinguished task force with exceptional members from various parts of the world who worked diligently and were tremendously committed to producing the final document.

I am delighted that we have here today the chairman of Gorta, Professor Denis Lucey, Mr. Tom Arnold of Concern, and Mr. Brendan McMahon of the Department of Foreign Affairs food aid.

Ireland has an enviable reputation in the area of food aid, and in contributing to the alleviation of hunger and deprivation in many parts of the world. For many centuries we had missionaries, priests, nuns, monks and lay people in all corners of the world trying to help out and make life a bit better for people in extreme hunger and deprivation. To this day individuals make their contributions to NGOs and civil society. As recently as last week I saw a disquieting programme on Haiti. Sure enough a number of Irish people were at the centre of things making their contribution. We contribute to helping to deal with this appalling situation, as we have been doing for a long time. The White Paper recommended that a task force be established and produce recommendations.

I remember when we embarked on this exercise, I made the point that the task force would have failed if the Government was not challenged by this report. Its recommendations should be a wake-up call, I said, and must make the Government feel uncomfortable. I am sure that some people here might argue that it is difficult enough to make the Government feel uncomfortable, but that is what we set out to do in this matter.

I know our report grabbed the attention of people responsible in Government, particularly the overseas development aid section of the Department of Foreign Affairs and galvanised them into action. I am glad to see that the recently appointed Minister of State with responsibility for overseas development, Deputy Peter Power, has embraced this report and made it the centrepiece of his stewardship of Ireland's overseas aid programme.

All the members of this committee present are active politicians and are familiar with the cut and thrust of politics — and the activities and campaigns of the lobbies and interest groups that agitate for various policy changes. However, in all the give and take of debate which takes place in this House, there is one group missing, one lobby that is rarely heard, that is, the hungry. The starving do not have a voice. In many respects the hungry are the most voiceless of all on the development and humanitarian agendas. I hope today, at this hearing, we will all begin to hear their voice and their pathetic cry for help. In the debate which currently absorbs all of us — the economic recession; banking crises, food safety crises — we can lose sight of the most important single political crisis underlying today's world, namely, that almost 1 billion people do not have enough to eat. This means that every sixth person in today's world goes to bed hungry every night. A third of the world's children are stunted through under-nutrition — every third child is stunted — so from the beginning they are doomed and have no chance. The mothers who give birth to their babies are undernourished. The child is undernourished in the womb, it is born undernourished, and by the age of two it is stunted with irreversible damage to its physical and mental development. Regrettably the situation is not getting better. It is getting worse and is deteriorating as we speak.

When we drafted this report, for example, we used a figure derived from the World Food summit held in Rome in June of last year, 862 million, on the cover, in September. Since that was put together the figure has risen to 1 billion. Indifference and complacency has consigned a further 100 million people to a life of hunger and destitution. When one cuts through all of the pledges, the documents and fine speeches the forgotten silent abandoned starving billion human beings must be seen in high relief. We must be angry and moved to action. That is what this report is about and we cannot lose sight of those unfortunate people.

Some 160 years ago here in Ireland we had our own great hunger, the Famine that wiped out a million people. It displaced millions more over time. When we were taught history in school we were told that tragedy need not have happened but it was allowed to happen because those who died were the poor, the marginalised, the uneducated, and the vulnerable. They had no voice that could be heard — and those in a position to hear went into denial. Then, as now, nobody shouted stop.

The hunger task force report was presented to the Taoiseach and the UN Secretary General, Ban Ki-moon, at a special event during the Millennium Summit in New York in September. In summary, the report, while recognising the full complexity of the issues and the range of response required, chose to focus on three areas. The first involves increasing the productivity of smallholder agriculture, bearing in mind the overwhelming majority of farmers in the affected areas are women. We all see them on our television screens and in newspapers, women hoeing the fields, out at work. The second area is concerned with implementing programmes to tackle maternal and infant under-nutrition. The third is to ensure that political commitment at national and international levels, gives hunger the absolute priority it deserves and above all translates commitment into action.

Members will all have received copies of this report. I hope they will discern the fundamental tone of anger it contains at the fact that today's famines are no different from ours. They need not have happened, but are being allowed to. In a world of plenty, 1 billion people are hungry. Notwithstanding current economic and financial uncertainties, we have the technology and the science to provide for all of those people. Essentially we must ask how we can continue to accept in this world of plenty that one sixth of its population does not have enough to eat. The report is quite clear on this point. It is not a question of not knowing what is required or of passing the necessary resolutions or declarations. It is, "that we just need to decide to do it, to take action". That is why the third of the recommended focus areas, namely governance, is the most important — to ensure real political commitment to give hunger the absolute priority it deserves.

I know the Minister of State, Deputy Power, is in the course of preparing the Government's response to this report, and all the signs are that it will be positive. I am glad that this is the case. I hope the response will not alone be positive, but also robust. I hope it will be balanced and contain an appropriate sense of urgency, because the elimination of hunger from our world is not just a matter of money. We have a world of plenty and need to translate the commitments, resolutions and pledges into action. In recent weeks, when there was trouble in Wall Street and in many of the better echelons of society worldwide, there was considerable action. When the engines were spluttering in Detroit with General Motors, Ford and Chrysler, there was a fairly quick response and a peremptory get-together to sort out the problems. Regrettably, the starving do not have a voice such as that. The voiceless people need those in the corridors of power to take the matter seriously and not be in denial.

It is not about money. It is that we must follow through on the pledges and commitments in a tangible way to give an opportunity to these people. Ten million children are dying each year. In Malawi, which the Chairman has visited, 50% of children die of malnutrition before they are five years of age. The 50% of children who survive are stunted for life physically and mentally. It is harrowing.

The essential political point in this report is how we ensure that hunger gets the attention it deserves from both donor and recipient governments. How do we get this issue to the very top of the international agenda and keep it there? How can we ensure we move from talk to action, which we must do to tackle this international obscenity? How do we ensure that all governments and agencies live up to their responsibilities and commitments? These are the areas I hope the Irish Government will make a special effort to address in its response to this report.

Ireland should play a pivotal leadership role in the global fight against hunger. There are many instances where individual countries have taken up the cudgels in regard to a specific matter. They are not trying to solve all of the world's problems. To give just one example, Norway has taken up the cudgels on behalf of conflict resolution and is doing an excellent job. Ireland should play a pivotal role in the fight against hunger. We are well suited to that, particularly because of our history in regard to famine and hunger.

I look for support from all Oireachtas Members and ask that the members of this very influential committee would remember the hungry and starving. Nobody is asking us to put our hands in our pockets. It is not a question of money or finance. It is a question of giving a voice to the voiceless in the important corridors where decisions are taken and to translate those commitments into action to alleviate and eradicate this scandal. We must remember the hungry and be ever mindful of this continuing crisis and of the willingness of all to prioritise this appalling situation, both at national and international level. In a world of plenty, it is appalling so many people still go to bed hungry at night and so many die of starvation.

In the traumatic documentary on Haiti shown recently, a person arrives with a truck and says he has 100 bodies to be buried. The 100 bodies were nondescript and nameless, and the open grave into which they were put had no headstone. That was a daily occurrence. It is a symptom in just one location in the world of the problems we face. Despite all our immediate problems, we should give a little of our time because we are privileged to have a platform, a focus and a degree of influence to try to make a difference for at least some of these people.

Mr. Tom Arnold

This report has appeared at an appropriate and in a sense fortunate time. We were also, as the committee can readily observe, very fortunate in the leadership we got from Mr. Joe Walsh. The significance of the timing is that in the first half of 2008, the big increase in food and energy prices and the impact that was having on the poor began to push the issue of hunger right to the top of the political agenda for the first time since the early 1970s, which is the nearest analogy with regard to high food prices.

It appeared for much of this year that the issue was beginning to get attention. The UN Secretary General set up a high level task force with the heads of the UN agencies in April. They worked towards a meeting in Rome in June where a comprehensive framework for action was set out as well as a set of short and long-term policies that were necessary to defeat hunger. The G8 meeting in July was also focused on this issue. At that meeting, the EU committed €1 billion to boost food production in food insecure countries.

Then, as Mr. Walsh said, the financial crisis came along in September and the focus has shifted inevitably to that crisis. The scale of resources that were suddenly available to deal with the crisis ran into hundreds of billions of euro. What we were talking about to implement the comprehensive framework for action to deal with hunger represented €35 billion to €40 billion a year, which is small change by comparison to what is being talked about. The next occasion when this issue is back on the agenda is at a meeting in Spain at the end of January where the follow-up to the June meeting will happen.

The hunger task force report came out at the right time but it also came out with the right messages. To deal with hunger, there has to be a comprehensive approach. The two areas on which we have focused in our report are dealing with increasing the productivity of smallholder African agriculture and the issue of maternal and child nutrition. These are two key areas that need greater priority in policy both at the developing country level and in donor policies. The third area we have included is that of political commitment, which connects to the issue of Irish leadership. For years, I have been advocating that Ireland should take this leadership role just as Norway has led the way in terms of conflict resolution. Ireland should seek to be the Norway for hunger.

I would like to conclude with six points on how this can be put into play. The report states as a starting point that hunger itself should be at the centre of the Irish Aid programme and it recommends a certain percentage of our resources over the next few years for that purpose. The action plan the Minister of State, Deputy Peter Power, is working on is very important. We need to consider promoting new forms of partnership within Ireland to develop national capacity in this field. This is not just a job for Government; it requires new partnerships between Government, NGOs, universities and the private sector. We in Concern have developed a number of these partnerships already with the likes of the Kerry Group and the International Food Policy Research Institute, and with Trinity College on the area of material and child health.

There are many possibilities. We need to identify the key strategic relationships outside of Ireland that can work towards this agenda, and we are well on the way to doing that. We need to develop mechanisms for learning from what we are doing. If we are committed to this as a goal, there has to be a cycle of learning, if one likes, built into our work.

Political leaders have an important role to play. Following on from the hunger task force, hunger needs to be a significant part of the overall Irish foreign policy positions. The Government should use opportunities in various fora to articulate a distinctive Irish agenda on this. It needs parliamentary oversight. We are having this meeting today but the committee should have another meeting in a year, and another a year after that, to ascertain whether the commitments made in this report are being followed through and delivered upon.

Professor Denis Lucey

We were delighted to be asked to become members of this task force. I felt deeply honoured both in my university and Gorta roles because we had been telling our students for years that so many of the issues in developing countries about hunger and poverty were rural issues. We see the urban issues on television but 70% or 80% of the hungry and the poor, especially in sub-Saharan Africa, live in the rural areas.

The normal market supply conditions we would expect here to get food to those people in our world do not exist there. They do not have the supply chains or local production. When they have food they eat it. They do not normally have enough food for the rest of the year. They go hungry and food does not get to them unless there is an extreme disaster. At the same time the world emphasis on assistance towards developing agriculture, or even the interest of the countries themselves in putting money into the development of their agriculture, had declined and had not kept pace with the problem which was getting bigger.

Other members of the committee and I were delighted at the timing of the establishment of the hunger task force. We came from diverse backgrounds and threw our energy into it. We meshed, agreed and came up with what I consider are clear and concise recommendations. We did not write a document for ourselves but one that would be of interest to the reasonably well informed and politically well intentioned person in the world. In particular, we want to engage in dialogue with people who have a political voice because, as the Chairman said, most of the those in sub-Saharan Africa who are involved as hungry and poor people in rural areas are in small scale agriculture. They are mainly women, often widowed with children, or a granny and grandchildren with the middle generation wiped out by AIDS or other chronic illnesses. They have little or no voice in policy making and they certainly have little or no power in local markets.

It is essential to capitalise on the role of women in raising food and in raising children. That is the origin of the twin emphasis on the two inter-related themes in the recommendation — a refocus on agriculture at small scale level and an inter-linked focus on nutrition, bearing in mind the tremendous role of women in developing countries, both in household nutrition and in local food production. Those two issues are inter-linked because up to now there may have been nutritional interventions which were not related to agriculture and there may have been agriculture issues which were never related to what was happening in the households in the area but may have been geared towards the export market, which are a stage of development, but do not necessarily give the highest return in those countries.

The third issue on which we focused was that of estimates, as Mr. Tom Arnold has said, of €30 billion or €40 billion for the entire world to try to achieve the millennium development goal targets on hunger. That is a small amount compared to the amount of money that has been found for a crisis that hurts the northern hemisphere in recent times. There has not been the political will to honour the commitments made at the World Food Summit and at millennium development conferences by developing countries in regard to the attention they would give to their food area and also the various international agencies that have difficulty in working together in this area.

An advocacy role for the poor and the hungry to get governments and agencies to live up to the promises that have been made, and the priority they say they want to give them, is important. We believed — it came home to us in what the Chairman said — when finalising report we had the most recent FAO figure of 862 million people at risk. By the time we hit the streets with the report the figure was up to 925 million. The latest account from the FAO a few days ago shows that the figure is now almost 1 billion. Since signing off on the report some months ago, the position has got much worse, not better. Unless we act soon the position will get far worse. The situation in sub-Saharan Africa today is that one in six people throughout the world — one third of the population of sub-Saharan Africa — fall into the chronically hungry category.

I do not wish to throw out scare statistics, the data are available. We are cutting through all the reports we would write for one another and for ourselves and we are trying to say that a refocus on agriculture, especially for small holders and women small holders, is vitally important because that is where the hunger is. I would have said a long time ago that the distribution systems to the supply chains are weak in Africa. When Kofi Annan attended Mr. Tom Arnold's event to mark the 40th anniversary of Concern he said it is extremely urgent to fix the broken supply chains.

Local markets have broken down. That aspect of agriculture and those women farmers have no market power and no political voice but they are the key people in household nutrition, managing water for crops and clean water for households, feeding infants and ensuring that healthy babies are born. That is the reason for recommendations Nos. 1 and 2 and recommendation No. 3, that organisations, governments, NGOs, international agencies keep their attention focused on this problem until results are achieved to break down that number le cúnamh Dé.

Chairman

I thank Professor Lucey. Would Mr. McMahon like to speak? I welcome the drift of the report. Having been involved with the foundation of An Foras Talúntais, the Agriculture Research Institute, as was the chairman Mr. Joe Walsh, it was clear once one became involved that 85% of the people were totally dependent on agriculture, having been involved in peasant informing. It was similar to Ireland in the 1940s. Many younger people would not understand what that was like but it was a disastrous situation.We are in a good position to be leaders and we have great experience. There is no question about that. Much work is being done by the Irish NGOs through the embassies. We need to get it across to people that this is vital work, that it is successful and is long term.

Deputy John Deasy

I commend the delegates on their work on this report. As Professor Lucey said this is a rapidly worsening situation. In his presentation, Mr. Walsh said we have to move from talk to action. When he put together the group to draw up this report he made it clear that it would differ from previous analyses. In so doing, he has raised expectations that this will become Government policy. He did so because the report's recommendations advocate that 20% of Irish Aid's overall budget should go towards combating hunger. This constitutes a pretty radical departure from the manner in which the money is being spent. There are vested interests associated with every aid budget and people have opinions as to how money should be spent. If one provides 20% of the overall aid budget of approximately €1 billion, or €200 million, towards combating hunger, the question arises as to whether one will build the proposed 14 schools in north-western Uganda. The task force now has had three months. Mr. Walsh is a former Cabinet Minister who knows everyone in Leinster House. He must already have had discussions with the director of Irish Aid, the Minister of State and the Minister for Foreign Affairs on the report's findings and the recommended areas of action.

As for the point made by Mr. Arnold on oversight, I am unsure. Oversight takes place once the Government decision has been made to adopt the task force's recommendations. Thereafter, I might take over to ascertain whether it is going about it. My understanding is that no decision yet has been taken in this regard. For the sake of argument, Mr. Walsh should assume I agree with everything the report suggests on how this money should be spent. In my position as a member of Fine Gael, the question I am trying to ask is what has been the response of the Government. Members will have seen the letter from the Minister of State, Deputy Peter Power, who they find to be a serious person who engages deeply with such issues. By now, Mr. Walsh should have gleaned some idea as to the Government's intentions with regard to his report's findings. If possible, he should indicate what the Government's response has been.

Chairman

If Mr. Walsh prefers, we will take a number of questions together. I call Deputy Rory O'Hanlon.

Deputy Rory O’Hanlon

I thank Mr. Walsh——

Deputy John Deasy

May I make a point? Perhaps two or three questions could be taken together because questions sometimes are lost by the time the response is made.

Chairman

We can do this. We will take two or three questions.

Deputy Michael D. Higgins

Can we do them in pairs?

Chairman

Very well.

Deputy Rory O’Hanlon

I thank Mr. Joe Walsh and his colleagues for their attendance and I compliment them on their work in preparing the hunger task force report. I agree with the Chairman that Ireland should take a pivotal role in addressing world hunger. Mr. Walsh gave the example of Norway's activities in respect of conflict resolution. I have a couple of points. First, it must be a matter of concern for everyone that hunger is increasing, not decreasing, despite the good work being done. Is there a way in which it could at least be prevented from increasing in the short term, to avoid members learning of a further increase in six months' time?

I refer to the question of food production that emerges from both the hunger task force report and the comments of Mr. Tom Arnold, namely, the balance between giving food or providing people with the means to support themselves with their own food. It is important to get the balance right between providing food immediately or giving people the wherewithal to produce their own food in both the short and medium terms. This brings me to the question of funding and in particular the amount of voluntary funding sent from Ireland. Were such voluntary funding to be included in the 0.7% figure, it would be in the interest of the developing country because it is important to know the amount of funding that is being sent.

I refer to the question of co-ordinated effort in the developing world to ensure one gets the best value for the human and financial resources being invested. Given the multiplicity of agencies delivering such services in the developing world, one must ensure there is co-ordination. I have witnessed this issue in Ghana in respect of how AIDS was being addressed. Two facilities, one of which was run by UNICEF and another in a local hospital, were operating an AIDS teaching programme. However, neither was aware of the other's existence, even though they were only a mile apart. Such duplication must be addressed in everything we do.

Towards the end of his address, Mr. Walsh made three or four points about how to ensure that hunger gets the attention it deserves. When defining hunger and poverty, particularly in the developed world, we tend to address poverty in terms of relative poverty. Any agency that addresses poverty should consider it in the context of world poverty. Where do we fit in respect of world poverty in Ireland and other developed countries? When one visits sub-Saharan Africa, one witnesses real poverty. However, on one's return home, one hears that 25% of children in Ireland live in poverty. One certainly will not get hunger to the top of the agenda with such a mind set. Consequently, it is important to consider poverty in one's own country in the context of global poverty. My final question to the panel pertains to their three priorities for the Government at present. I commend the Government, despite the financial difficulties that obtain, on continuing to ensure that Ireland will maintain its commitments in 2009 to the developing world.

Chairman

If a third member contributes now, we will have two lots of three questions. I call Deputy Michael D. Higgins.

Deputy Michael D. Higgins

I join those who have paid tribute to the members of the task force group, to whom everyone is indebted. I also pay tribute to the strong advocacy in the report and to the passion with which its members have spoken before the joint committee this afternoon, particularly its chairman, members' former colleague, Mr. Joe Walsh.

I wish to raise a few points that struck me because within 15 minutes of this meeting's conclusion, the select committee will discuss interim economic partnership agreements with the European Union in respect of three countries, namely, Côte d'Ivoire, Ghana and the Central African Republic. One immediately may ask whether the thinking contained in the excellent document before members informs the three interim agreements to be discussed. In my view, it does not. I am concerned about this and the best tribute I can pay to my former and cherished Cabinet colleague, Mr. Joe Walsh, is to speak plainly.

The report makes some very valuable connections and some valuable distinctions. For example, the issue of food supply to meet food shortages is not the same as that pertaining to agricultural production and this is an important point. The joint committee welcomes the inclusion of nutrition into the mix, because it is terribly important. Moreover, in respect of those regions the joint committee has studied over the years, the geography of this issue changes. I refer, for example, to the nutrition issue in south Asia, the different issue in respect of Africa and so forth. However, members should not run away from a number of points. Three years ago the World Bank acknowledged it had neglected agriculture. In Africa, the rates of agricultural production differ, as Mr. Walsh pointed out. In many countries in west Africa, production has increased, sometimes by as much as 10%. The increase comprises some 80% of smallholders and even more female producers.

I welcome the emphasis on agricultural production, but there is no point in imagining that the same economic model can deliver on this report and drive African economies and states towards the production of surplus without, for example, allowing them to protect food security. At the following meeting, I will raise the issue of the absence of sufficient protection for food security. It is wrong to suggest the models are different when they are not. I am referring to governance rather than the task force. Therefore, a new economic model is required whereby food sufficiency, nutritional needs, means of getting products to market, refrigeration, storage and so forth come before any imposed trade demand on such countries. Irrespective of whether people want to listen, this is what Africans are saying.

The report, which I read with great care, mentions a request for a new dialogue. While I agree with the request, a new dialogue should not impose WTO conditions on countries that have not had an opportunity to discuss what has been directed at them. The report is right to mention fragmentation because there is no consistency between a model that is perishing dramatically in several different places and the alleged aid orientation.

I commend the task force on page 22 of its submission. Committees such as this should not fall into a trap. The submission states that the numbers and the description need not be given again. Not even pledges are necessary. Instead, what is required is performance. Page 22 contains a list of broken promises that should shame the parliaments and governments of the world. The media should also be ashamed for falling into the trap of recording these glorious commitments that never occur. For this reason, I describe the report as strong advocacy.

Another important point is referenced at the back of the report. It refers to the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It is contentious that there is no acceptance of the human right to food. While we do not want to waste our time on legalisms, one could argue that this right derives from the general declaration and others, but there is neither an explicit right to develop or to food. We could make progress in this regard.

The report makes an oblique reference to how some members of the task force were in favour of a UN commissioner for hunger, which is a fine proposal. I remember when the position of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights was established after a meeting in 1993. There was a blaze of interest in how the human rights issue would be entirely recast, but it never came about. Instead, we have gone backwards. Even this country has, but we will go into that on another day. I would support the proposal.

I welcome the report's style of direct speak. While I want to believe that the Minister of State, Deputy Peter Power, is interested in the matter, given the fact that, according to the letter submitted to us by the witnesses, he will make it his strategy's centrepiece, I am made pessimistic by the slightest suggestion of the basic tyrannical economic model. I am one of the longest serving members of this committee and I have been a Deputy for a long time, but I see no willingness to accept that the single hegemonic model imposed on Africa, Asia and elsewhere is giving way in the institutions.

There is a considerable contradiction between statements at the Food and Agriculture Organisation meeting in Rome, at the IMF meeting and at the World Bank meeting. It is an interesting matter for every parliament. The committee attended a parliamentary assembly of the World Bank where the discussion was phrased in an anti-agricultural way. It has taken a long time to turn those institutions. It is not just that they contradict one another; they are rife with internal contradictions.

While I congratulate our guests on this report, I do not underestimate the absence of sincerity at government level in Europe and elsewhere. After this meeting when we consider the content of the interim economic partnership agreements being imposed on three African countries in the absence of regional agreements, we shall see whether there is consistency between our supposedly new departure and what we are asking of those countries this side of Christmas.

Chairman

I thank Deputy Higgins. At this stage, replies should be given to the three sets of questions asked. Following those replies, three other members will ask further questions. We must finish by approximately 4.20 p.m. because of the other meeting referred to by Deputy Higgins.

Deputy Michael D. Higgins

We are not required——

Chairman

We can run a little late.

Deputy Michael D. Higgins

We will not rush that meeting either.

Chairman

No. It will be open-ended.

Mr. Joe Walsh

I thank the Chairman. I will be brief. Deputy Deasy asked the critical question about what will be done about the issue now. We all have experience of fine reports being presented to us, primarily with good intentions behind them. As the gospel says, however, good intentions without good works are not much good.

Despite the various cutbacks and difficulties in the budget, I was pleased by the Minister of State's commitment to retain the overall allocation for this particular area. Were it not for the report, which was published at a critical time when all Departments were being asked to make savings and to leave people out, the hungry would have been left out in terms of the overall amount of money.

Chairman

That is accepted, but Mr. Walsh should not forget that we were keeping a watching brief. I am quite serious about that.

Mr. Joe Walsh

I am pleased with the Chairman's intervention because we will call on the committee to continue with its brief.

Chairman

We will indeed.

Mr. Joe Walsh

I will return to seek a meeting after Easter or closer to the summer to determine how we are doing. There must be a matrix or audit in the donor and recipient countries. A substantial amount of money is earmarked for this problem. Is it having the desired effect?

When I went to Malawi with the committee on a field visit, I was able to say that we were implementing the Horace Plunkett model used when I was growing up in rural Ireland. It worked. The little creameries now have better technology to extend shelf lives due to people like Mr. Arnold, Deputy Woods and those at An Foras Talúntais. One must try to maintain food for people. I was a creamery manager in my younger days. We separated the milk, retained the cream for the better off who needed their palettes enhanced somewhat with fine food and returned the skimmed milk to the farm for livestock feed. That was the nutritional part, as it had the protein and so on. We have grown up and made cheese, baby food, supplements and a range of products. The technology is available to cope with many of our problems. For this reason, we are not looking for people to put their hands in their pockets. Rather, we are looking to have commitments translated into action.

In summary, the Minister of State said that this committee can expect a strong response from him to our excellent report. We will monitor the situation and hold him up to his mark.

Deputy O'Hanlon spoke about relative poverty versus the grinding poverty experienced in Sub-Saharan Africa. I found it upsetting to visit orphanages and hospitals and realise that so little could be done. We are all in a position, in our own ways, to give a voice to these voiceless people and that is what I want to happen.

In his usual erudite and forthright way, Deputy Higgins not only knew what was in the report but could identify the pages from which his references were taken. These broken commitments are the real scandal. International leaders and organisations were in a position to make a difference to these people's lives but their promises were balls of smoke and without sincerity. That is why we enumerated the commitments and set out three direct objectives for us to achieve. Neither I nor my committee colleagues will rest easy until we see these recommendations making a difference.

Mr. Tom Arnold

Ultimately, policy matters. A question arises in respect of the contribution this report makes to shifting policy at different levels within Ireland and at the European level. I am involved in NGO lobbying efforts in Europe to monitor EU policy on agriculture with a view to ensuring it is based on the right principles. However, policy is also critically important at an African level. As Professor Lucey has noted, there has been a long-term neglect of agriculture and the rural investment needed to deal with these problems, although this has begun to shift. Last year's world development report of the World Bank acknowledged that mistakes were made and that a shift is needed to viewing agriculture as an investment for development. Our report has been well received internationally and, given that it is known and respected, the Government must find its voice in various international fora to promote the key principles it set out and to shift policy towards the priorities it identified.

Professor Denis Lucey

I am delighted at the response we have received. It is clear that members of this committee want to know how they can work together to make progress on these problems for developing countries. None of us has all the answers and, as Deputy Higgins pointed out, the same solution will not work everywhere. We should not necessarily impose a solution which works in a developed country possessing good infrastructure and strong supply chains.

The Chairman spoke about his early career. Many of us, especially those of us who were involved with An Foras Talúntais, can remember the stages through which Ireland's rural society and food production passed in its transformation since the mid-1950s. This did not happen overnight but required concerted efforts on the part of public policy and local farmers' organisations to build supply chains, stimulate local small scale production and get people to co-operate. In 1958, if one had waved a magic wand and said "let there be a market", that would not have taken care of everything and the same applies today. We have to work with people and get things moving. This issue is wider than any single sector of society and the Government cannot address it on its own. Those of us who are involved in NGOs must decide on how we will co-operate. I am proud to say that a dialogue has commenced between Gorta, Concern and Trocaire with a view to developing synergies in our respective activities so that we are ready to work with Irish Aid on the policies we hope will be implemented as a result of this committee's continued vigilance.

Senator Ann Ormonde

I welcome the representatives of the hunger task force. This is a good report which contains a lot of straight talk. Having visited Malawi, Uganda and Tanzania, I can identify with the three critical areas identified in terms of improving agricultural standards in small holdings and the malnutrition of women and infants. Women play a critical role in this. During my visits to rural areas, I was struck by the power of women once they could implement simple programmes in water management, diversification, intensive farming and other areas. I welcome the report's emphasis on women.

We have been speaking about the policy shifts needed to implement programmes. As Professor Lucey noted, the same policy will not suit every country. I commend the Irish embassies in the areas I visited over the past several months on the co-ordination they encourage within civil society and the wider community and the goodwill they receive from governments. However, do we have the right mix in terms of international governance?

Does a problem arise in terms of a multiplicity of agencies doing the same work? I asked these questions during my visits to these countries because accountability for resources is very important. While I respect the great work being done by agencies, sometimes programmes appear to be duplicated unnecessarily.

The essential recommendations of this report can be implemented. However, I wonder how the proposal of a special envoy to oversee their implementation can be developed if the systems and personnel are to vary between countries. It is a huge task. Given that Ireland is comfortable in taking the lead, why not use our embassies, which are doing perfect work in this area, as our envoys in managing the programme?

Chairman

I do not have much flexibility with the time because the House has made a decision regarding the time at which the Select Committee on Foreign Affairs shall meet. We must conclude by 4.35 p.m. at the latest.

Deputy Seán Ardagh

I will not speak for longer than 15 minutes. I congratulate the hunger task force on producing this fine report. I also commend the Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs, Deputy Peter Power, on his acceptance of it. From speaking with him on a one-to-one basis, I understand he intends to put this report and the entire question of hunger at the centre of his work as Minister of State with responsibility for overseas development assistance.

I was fortunate enough to go to Malawi with the committee and we arrived when it was just coming to rainy season. The food had not yet run out. Having said that, according to the documentation supplied by the witnesses, it appears great strides have been made in Malawi, as 5 million people were significantly short of food in late 2005 and that was down to 500,000 in 2007. In Vietnam there seems to have been significant strides made, and one wonders why they have not been made in other countries with the same problems.

The issue of smallholders was mentioned and it appears that while co-ops have not worked in China and Vietnam — they had to be split up — there must be some compromise, meaning a process can be big enough for people to work together and get better results than working as individuals. Allied to this is fair trade, as the world must purchase goods from these poorer countries on a fair trade basis.

Another question relates to food. Do the witnesses provide food or fertilisers and seed? This relates to giving a man a fish and him eating for a day and teaching a man to fish to feed him for life. There is also the question of money being put into flood relief and land reclamation. Those types of investments were needed in Malawi as there could be a flood there at any stage. Counter-measures to floods must be put in place so floods do not have the bad effect they would otherwise have. Do the witnesses deal with food or flood relief and land reclamation?

Senator Mary M. White

I congratulate the task force chaired by a former Minister, Mr. Joe Walsh. I am not throwing bouquets at Mr. Walsh but it was an inspiration for me personally to hear his passion on the issue. There is no doubt we are all in denial about the extent of hunger in the world in the way the rest of Europe was in denial about us when we were starving. I often think the current generation of young Irish people are not as aware of the Famine as our generation was. Those of us growing up in the 1960s will remember a big report done on the Famine and the Great Hunger. I bought it again recently to reread.

We should be able to identify with the 1 billion people who are starving. I vividly remember watching the Gleneagles summit in 2005 and the accompanying razzmatazz but I knew at the time it was a public relations exercise. I am not a cynical person by nature but there were too many people looking for presence on television over those couple of days.

We should lobby strongly for the appointment of a commissioner for hunger in the UN. We know how successful the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights has been in doing an audit of countries. The passion of Mr. Walsh has done me good today — we are in hard times and the economic atmosphere is pretty depressing. It is a high powered task force. Although I do not sit on this committee I came to hear the submission of Mr. Walsh. This committee is led by the Chairman, Deputy Michael Woods. I would support a push for a commissioner for hunger with the UN.

Chairman

Senator Norris will have two minutes.

Senator David Norris

That is sufficient. I congratulate the task force on this very hard hitting report, which we debated in the Seanad. I liked the uncompromising and undiplomatic language, which is what we need. On the question of whether we lived up to the commitments, the answer given very clearly is "No". People and politicians make commitments, as Senator White has stated, and I have seen it time and again. People step up to the plate but they do not deliver, and these people should be exposed. For every Government that indicates it will donate €15 million and gets credit for it in newspapers, we should publish findings if they did not do it or lied about it.

I must go to the briefing regarding Pamela Izevbekhai but one issue that has not been mentioned so far today is population, which is a causative factor. It is not just about changes in food prices. For our own global and domestic religious reasons we may decide to avoid the matter because the Vatican has a political status and continually gets its neck stuck in matters such as the Cairo population summit. It frustrates attempts to control population, but it must be done.

In the period since I left Trinity College with my degree, the population of the world has much more than doubled. How can we deal with the food problem? We cannot do so until some measures are taken to stabilise population growth. It is a simple mathematical equation that even somebody like me, who failed the leaving certificate in arithmetic, can see. The population will again double by 2050.

It is not just a question that food prices have gone up, as they will fluctuate. Population continues to inevitably and remorselessly increase. We must face that issue and if we do so in an honest way, we may avoid some of the excesses of the Chinese Government. At least it faced the problem, as very few others are doing so. We must deal with the problem or else we can forget it.

We are all implicated in this. Senator White mentioned the Famine, which was a dreadful and traumatic experience for the Irish people. My Irish ancestors were big landlords at the time but were wiped out helping the tenants and in getting Famine fever. They were an old Gaelic family. At that stage we were three days from London and economic theory governed the attitude of the people. We are now a microsecond away from every disaster through modern communications. We are not three days away but we still have these theories and capitalism. The idea was founded on an infinitely expanding market, which cannot happen because we have finite resources. We are coming up against this problem with oil, and water will be the next issue.

Mr. Joe Walsh

I will make a brief contribution as the experts present have far more to contribute than I. There was some important language used by the members of the committee, including my good friend and former Cabinet colleague, Deputy Michael D. Higgins. He used the word "shame", which is very evocative. Governments and international agencies should be named and shamed. Another word used was "lying", which is appropriate because such parties have lied. They made commitments which they had no notion of implementing. We named them on page 22. It is outrageous enough to tell lies or exaggerate outside a church in the heat of an election but when dealing with the misery associated with hunger of unfortunate and voiceless people, it is unacceptable.

We emphasised the role of women. With the cultures in many countries, which vary significantly, it is disturbing to see women going out to do the work while raising children. That is the culture. Family planning programmes may be put in place. The male of the species is not interested. When the women grow cash crops the male of the species goes into town and does his best to spread AIDS all over the place. He comes back and contaminates his spouse as well. These are the realities of what goes on there. It is terrible and I find it upsetting. We emphasise very strongly that women should be empowered. They should be educated and they should get these lazy irresponsible husbands, or whatever they are, to do a day's work and to be a bit more responsible in the way they treat their families, their spouses in particular. That is very much highlighted in the report.

The Senator suggested there were too many embassies. We stated clearly in the report that the architecture of aid should be attended to and streamlined. The multiplicity of agencies and the duplication that goes on waste money and resources. Of the amounts allocated, only a small percentage reaches the unfortunate families. Of course, embassies should be used, as Deputy Ardagh mentioned. We deliberately highlighted the success stories to show that it can be done and of course it can be done. Places such as Ghana were included to say: "This can be done and there is a model for doing it". We put in the success stories.

Senator Mary White talked about having a commissioner for hunger at the United Nations. That is one of our key recommendations. We hope that it may be implemented because in other areas, particularly human rights, having a commissioner has been successful. Senator Norris talked about population. We referred to this though we did not propose a resolution on it. The absolute number of those who are hungry is increasing. Why? Population expansion is one of the reasons. One must keep ahead of the problem all the time. That reference is on page 5 of the report.

I have wasted enough of the committee's valuable time.

Chairman

Perhaps speakers might like to take a minute.

Mr. Tom Arnold

I wish to refer to Senator White's comments about young people forgetting our own history. Concern ran a major conference on hunger in October that was attended by Kofi Annan. One of the ventures we ran in association with it was a writing competition for young people. A total of 600 young people entered this competition from Ireland, the United Kingdom and the United States. We called the writing competition the Cecil Woodham Smith Competition in order to remind people there is a great book called The Great Hunger and they should read it.

Professor Denis Lucey

I have half a sentence. I believe the Chairman will now see why I got a buzz of pride when Joe Walsh presented and launched our report at the UN.

Chairman

He is a Corkman.

Professor Denis Lucey

Cork can be divisive on and off the field of play, so this is a compliment to him, irrespective of his place of origin.

This matter is extremely important because of the way the numbers have escalated in only one year. The situation will get worse if it is not tackled head on. I hope Ireland can take a lead in this. Now, above all times, when things are tight around the world, is the time to make sure that we do not forget these hungry people. Other market forces will continue to push up that number if the matter is not acted on now.

Chairman

The delegates make it very clear that, as far as they are concerned, there is a real and urgent need for political commitment. They have that commitment here today from the committee and they have it from the Oireachtas Sub-Committee on Overseas Development, which is chaired by Deputy John Deasy. They have a commitment from the Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs, Deputy Peter Power. We hope they will have it very shortly from the Government.

To date, the Government has gone a good distance in terms of money. We now need to give more leadership and we are in a position to do so. We have the experience to give that leadership. Sometimes we are a little reluctant about doing so. However, as one goes on and sees more one considers what we have gone through in this country, the experience we have had and the value of what we have to offer. We can see the importance of getting up and giving leadership.

This has been stimulating, as the delegates will have heard in different ways from the members. I can assure them it is our intention to follow through on the report. I do not know——

Deputy John Deasy

If I might differ from the Chairman——

Chairman

We are pushed for time——

Deputy John Deasy

I will be very brief. I differ very slightly from the Chairman. No commitment has been made. Let us be clear about that, when we consider the direction of the recommendations and the areas for action within this report. I shall make a suggestion. I asked a fairly simple question with regard to the response from the Government. It is clear that the delegates have not yet got a crystal clear response. That is fair enough. I suggest that I should ask the Minister of State, Deputy Peter Power, to come to the sub-committee in late January to explain what steps he is prepared to take with regard to the report. That might be helpful to everybody.

Chairman

Was Mr. McMahon ever in An Foras Talúntais?

Mr. Brendan McMahon

No.

Chairman

I see so many references to An Foras Talúntais. It must have been a good organisation.

Mr. Brendan McMahon

It has had misfortune.

Chairman

I thank the speakers again. We will certainly follow the lines they suggested.

The joint committee went into private session at 4.35 p.m. and adjourned at 4.45 p.m. sine die.