THE announcement in the estimates that Irish overseas aid for 1996 will once again fall short of the target figure of 0.05 per cent of GNP is extremely disappointing. Less than two years ago, the Government made a commitment to increasing our aid to the world's poorest nations by 0.05 per cent per annum until 1997. But it is now likely that, for the third year in succession, we will fail to meet even that extremely modest target.
As a proportion of GNP, Ireland's aid in 1995 ranked below the average contribution of OECD countries (0.3 per cent of GNP) and fell a long way short of the UN target of 0.7 per cent of GNP. The failure to meet the 0.05 per cent of GNP growth figure in 1996 is all the more disappointing given the many statements made during the year by various members of the Government in which they reiterated their commitment to the target figure.
In an address to the UN World Summit for Social Development in Copenhagen in March, the Taoiseach, Mr Bruton, restated the Government's commitment "to increasing our official overseas development assistance by 0.05 per cent each year so as to make steady progress towards the UN target of 0.7 per cent of GNP".
The actual increase in expenditure on overseas development assistance (ODA) of 19 per cent in 1996 may appear generous but it is, nonetheless, a major disappointment in that it is not sufficient to put us back on track towards attaining a level that is at least on a par with the average aid performance of other developed nations.
For some time there have been indications that the Government wishes to have the relationship between developed and developing nations as an important dimension of its forthcoming EU presidency. It is all the more regrettable that, in the year in which we assume the presidency, we will again fail to meet our to the world's poorest nations. In light of this failure, Ireland's credibility among our EU partners and the governments of the developing world will suffer.
The Government must be reminded that public support for overseas aid is very high, with a large majority seeing the continuance of aid to the poorest nations as a moral imperative. Furthermore, our commitment to increasing our ODA is widely recognised internationally and this commitment has enhanced Ireland's credibility among the poorer countries of the south and in the international development community generally.
Consequently, in the light of the forthcoming EU presidency, it is vital that Ireland's voice be heard internationally in support of a progressive approach towards multilateral aid based on the principles of partnership and solidarity. As long as we fail to make sufficient progress towards the UN target, we will not be in a position to speak out as we ought.
THERE is a further irony in the fact that we are falling short of our commitments to world's poorest people in 1996 a year designated to the elimination of global poverty by the UN. The elimination of that poverty is possible the human and financial resources for its elimination do exist. What is missing is the political will to achieve it. There is a striking contrast between the massive aid allocated by the US to Bosnia and the aid allocated by the US to sub Sabaran Africa.
Over the past 30 years, considerable progress has been made in developing countries, much of it made possible by development aid. Aid has, and does, play a crucial role in improving the lives of millions of people in Africa, Asia and Latin America. There is a need to take a long term view in planning our ODA spending. Our partners, especially those in sub Saharan Africa, need to be assured that resources will be made available over several years.
During the 1840s, poverty, injustice and sheer indifference killed a million of our own people. Much of the widespread hunger and malnutrition in today's world is caused by the same factors. At a time when we are remembering those who perished in the Famine, we have a duty as a nation to speak and act on behalf of the poor of our own time who look to us hopefully. If we are to be heard, we must underpin our concern with genuine compassion.
While accepting that Ruairi Quinn must balance the Budget, it must not be forgotten that the aid cutbacks of 1986-92 resulted in a serious loss of credibility for Ireland.
If domestic expenditure had been cut to the same degree as had overseas aid during those years, there would have been serious political repercussions in this country. But the people who are directly affected by cuts in our overseas aid budget some of the poorest people in the poorest countries have no voice in this debate. On their behalf, I call on Ruairi Quinn to think again before he finalises the Budget.
