O’Neill.qxd
01/06/2006
17:59
Page 183
Ireland’s Foreign Aid in 2005
Helen O’Neill
Centre for Development Studies, University College Dublin
ABSTRACT
This paper reviews Ireland’s official development assistance (ODA) programme in
2005. Last year was a momentous one in terms of events and policy initiatives
relating to development cooperation. The paper opens with an overview of these
developments at UN level and at EU level. It then examines the recommitment made
by Taoiseach Bertie Ahern at the UN General Assembly in September 2005 to meet
the UN target for ODA of 0.7% of gross national income (GNI) by 2012.
Because this manuscript had to be delivered in March rather than July, as was the
case in previous years, data on global ODA flows in 2005 were not available from
the OECD/DAC at the time of writing. For the same reason, it was not possible for
Development Cooperation Ireland (DCI) to supply detailed data on Irish ODA for
2005. Thus, the section on the bilateral side of the Irish aid programme focuses on
three topics only: aid architecture and the modalities of Irish aid; cooperation
between DCI and civil society organisations; and Ireland’s expenditure on
emergencies and recovery.
Since more data were available on the multilateral side of the programme,
expenditure through the Bretton Woods institutions, the UN and the EU are
examined in somewhat greater detail. The paper ends with an examination of the
mentoring programme for new EU member states that DCI launched in 2005 and of
the process of producing Ireland’s first White Paper on development cooperation.
That process began in 2005 and the White Paper will be published this year.
GLOBAL BACKGROUND AND DEVELOPMENTS IN 2005
Last year was remarkable for the attention focused at a global level on poverty in
developing countries and failing states. For the first time in many years, concerns
about sub-Saharan Africa were placed high up on the international agenda. The G8
summit in Gleneagles in July 2005 and British prime minister Tony Blair’s
Commission for Africa focused the attention of world leaders on development issues,
while the ‘Make Poverty History’ campaign and the ‘Live8’ pop concerts held in
major capital cities brought millions of young people on board. The UN
Millennium+5 summit in New York in September elicited new aid pledges—
Author’s e-mail: helen.oneill@ucd.ie
Irish Studies in International Affairs, Vol. 17 (2006), 183–202.
O’Neill.qxd
01/06/2006
184
17:59
Page 184
Irish Studies in International Affairs
including Ireland’s new commitment to reach the UN target for ODA of 0.7% of
GNI by 2012. In December, the WTO ministerial meeting within the Doha
development round took place in Hong Kong.
Despite the very limited progress on trade, overall 2005 produced a number of
positive initiatives. These included a deal to write off the debts owed by many of the
poorest countries to the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and the
African Development Bank. The UN and the G8 set an ambitious target of making
HIV/AIDS treatment available for all those who need it by 2010. Ambitious new
pledges were also made to increase aid, with half the increase promised to Africa. A
number of proposals from the UN Millennium Project, the Commission for Africa
and the OECD, if implemented, promise to make aid more predictable, harmonised
and effective. These increased aid pledges will have to be matched by increased aid
expenditures over the rest of the decade.
The December WTO ministerial meeting was part of the continuing Doha
Development Round of multilateral trade negotiations (MTNs) that had been
launched in Doha, Qatar in 2001 and were originally scheduled for completion by
the end of 2004. At the start of the round, WTO members agreed that development
issues and improved access for developing countries in industrialised-country
markets were to be placed at the heart of the negotiations. Issues under consideration
included dismantling tariff and non-tariff barriers in the agriculture, services and
industry sectors (including textiles and clothing); trade-related intellectual property
measures (TRIPS); and trade-related investment measures (TRIMs). In previous
MTN rounds, the interests of industrialised countries and blocs, especially the US
and the EU, dominated the agenda and thus tended to sideline the interests of
developing countries. Many developing countries have also been constrained by
weak negotiating capacity.
The 2005 Hong Kong WTO negotiations were dominated by agriculture. Some
progress was made. It was agreed to abolish agricultural export subsidies by 2013.
The EU, particularly Ireland and France, had great difficulty with this decision,
especially in relation to the timing. However, the declaration issued at the end of the
negotiations made it clear that the agreed date is conditional and that ‘loopholes have
to be plugged to avoid hidden export subsidies in credit, food aid and the sales of
exporting state enterprises’.1 It was also agreed that all export subsidies on cotton
would be eliminated in 2006 and that cotton exports from least-developed countries
(LDCs) would be allowed into industrialised countries free of duties or quotas from
the start of the period of implementing the new agriculture agreement. Of most
interest to the 32 LDCs represented at the negotiations was the agreement by rich
countries to provide duty-free and quota-free access to their markets for all LDC
products on a lasting basis.2
Despite these agreements, however, it was clear at the end of the Hong Kong
meeting that most tough decisions, especially on market access, had been postponed.
Industrialised countries are demanding substantial offers from the relatively big and
better-off developing countries to open their markets to services and manufacturers,
in return for improved market access in agricultural products. A new interim deadline
1WTO, ‘Ministers agree on declaration that “puts Round back on track”’, press release, 18
December 2005, 2, available at http://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/minist_e/min05_e/
min05_18dec_e.htm (24 March 2006).
2Pascal Lamy, ‘Concluding the WTO’s Doha round: the post Hong Kong roadmap’, speech by the
director-general of the WTO, delivered at the South African Institute of International Affairs,
Johannesburg, 10 February 2006.
O’Neill.qxd
01/06/2006
17:59
Page 185
O’NEILL—Ireland’s Foreign Aid in 2005
185
of April 2006 has been set for such offers, with a view to completing the round by
the end of this year.
As already mentioned, Ireland, in common with a number of EU member states,
had difficulties in relation to the date by which agricultural export subsidies would be
abolished. However, the presence of an Irish minister for agriculture and food at WTO
negotiations for the first time—along with the minister of state for development
cooperation and the minister for enterprise, trade and employment—worked in favour
of a coherent Irish approach, whereby the development dimension was kept on board.
Speaking at the end of the negotiations, Minister for Agriculture and Food Mary
Coughlan, TD, welcomed the agreement, which she said would promote growth in
developing countries while, at the same time, protecting her primary interests at the
negotiations. ‘I have taken a strong line during the week both bilaterally and in the
numerous Council of Ministers meetings held here in Hong Kong in urging the
Commission to resist the pressure for concessions’ she stated, adding that:
We won support for displaying a willingness to take the lead in finding a solution
that will enhance the lives of people in developing countries while defending the
legitimate interests of the agriculture and the agri-food industry in the EU where
the multifunctional model of agriculture takes into account such factors as
environmental protection, animal health and welfare and rural development.3
Developments at UN level
In the immediate aftermath of the invasion of Iraq in 2003, the secretary-general of
the UN, Kofi Annan, told world leaders that the United Nations had reached a fork
in the road. One way was reform and revitalisation, the other, growing irrelevance.
A reform process was set in train and, in April 2005, Minister for Foreign Affairs
Dermot Ahern, TD, was appointed as special envoy for UN reform. He accepted ‘this
onerous mandate because the United Nations has long been a cornerstone of
Ireland’s foreign policy’.4 An agreement on reform was reached and laid before the
UN General Assembly (UNGA) on 14 September 2005. Minister Ahern expressed
some disappointment with the results, especially since the agreement contained
nothing on disarmament and non-proliferation, or on the need to strengthen the
Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. As the first signatory to this treaty, this was a
matter of deep regret to Ireland. Nevertheless, Minister Ahern expressed satisfaction
with some key commitments on development, climate change and HIV/AIDS, and
the establishment of a ‘Human Rights Council’ and a ‘Peace-building Commission’
to help states emerging from conflict. As regards the commitment to changes in the
organisation itself, the minister stated that ‘the successful implementation of the
change agenda will be a major priority for Ireland over the coming months’.5
Speaking on the same day in the UNGA, Taoiseach Bertie Ahern, TD,
recommitted Ireland to reaching the UN target for ODA of 0.7% of GNI. The new
date for achieving this target is 2012 and, as the first milestone on the way to that
date, he committed the government to reach 0.5% by 2007. ‘Quantity is important’
3Department of Agriculture and Food, ‘Coughlan welcomes Hong Kong WTO agreement’, press
release, 18 December 2005.
4Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA), ‘Comments by Dermot Ahern, TD, minister for foreign
affairs on his appointment as special envoy for UN reform’, press release, 4 April 2005.
5DFA, ‘Minister for Foreign Affairs, Dermot Ahern, TD, welcomes agreement on UN reform’, press
release, 14 September 2005.
O’Neill.qxd
01/06/2006
186
17:59
Page 186
Irish Studies in International Affairs
he said ‘but so also is quality. Ireland is one of the very few donors all of whose aid
is untied’. He added: ‘Our aid will remain untied. Our aid is effective aid’.6 The new
actions to be supported by the new money involve: spending on HIV/AIDS to
increase to €100 million in 2006; a more rapid and more effective response to major
humanitarian emergencies; support for the UN to create a new fund to promote
democratic values throughout the world; and links between Irish industry and partner
companies in Africa to promote trade, investment and technology transfer.
Ireland joined the UN in December 1955. The fiftieth anniversary of this
important milestone in Ireland’s foreign policy history was marked by the annual
conference of the RIA’s National Committee for the Study of International Affairs
on 18 November 2005.
Developments at EU level
Last year was an exceptionally busy year in relation to advancing development policy
issues at European level. A new development policy statement was published; a major
scaling-up of European aid was announced, as was a new EU strategy for Africa.
The new statement on development policy (entitled the ‘European consensus on
development’) was agreed on 22 November 2005.7 It replaced the ‘Joint statement
on EC development policy’ of November 2000, which had guided the Commission’s
development activities for five years. The process of producing a new statement got
underway in December 2004. On 18 January 2005, the Commission produced an
‘issues paper’ and Commissioner Louis Michel launched a public consultation
process that closed on 19 March. A draft discussion document, circulated in July
2005, was the subject of intense debate among the various actors (European
Commission (EC), European parliament (EP), and member states (MSs)) before the
final document was agreed. The first development policy statement (DPS) had been
a milestone, in that it added substance to the development section of the Maastricht
treaty in 1992—the first time development had been included in the EU treaties.8
However, an assessment of the impact of the first DPS on EC aid9 concluded that a
new statement would have to reflect changes at international level since 2000—
including the quickening pace of globalisation—and new development commitments
taken on board by MSs at UN conferences as well as advances made in development
‘best practice’, such as budget support, the ‘Paris declaration on aid effectiveness’10
and the ‘Rome declaration on aid harmonisation and coordination’.11
6Department of the Taoiseach, ‘Speech by the taoiseach, Mr Bertie Ahern, TD, at the United Nations
General Assembly on Wednesday, 14 September, 2005’, press release, 16 September 2005.
7The text of the signed statement is available at http://europa.eu.int/comm/development/body/
development_policy_statement/docs/edp_declaration_signed_20_12_2005_en.pdf (24 March 2006).
8Community development cooperation is based on articles 177 to 181 of the Treaty of the European
Community.
9European parliament, Council and Commission, ‘Joint statement by the Council and the
representatives of the governments of the member states meeting within the Council, the European
parliament and the Commission on European Union development policy: the European Consensus’,
Brussels, 2006/C, 46/01, available at http://europa.eu.int/comm/development/body/development_
policy_statement/docs/edp_statement_oj_24_02_2006_en.pdf (24 March 2006). (Hereafter cited as
‘European consensus’.)
10High level forum on aid effectiveness, ‘Paris declaration on aid effectiveness. Ownership,
harmonisation, alignment, results and mutual accountability’, Paris, 28 February–2 March 2005,
available
at
www.adb.org/media/articles/2005/7033_
international_community_aid/paris_
declaration.pdf (27 March 2006). (Hereafter cited as ‘Paris declaration’.)
11High level forum on harmonisation, ‘Rome declaration on aid harmonisation and coordination’,
O’Neill.qxd
01/06/2006
17:59
Page 187
O’NEILL—Ireland’s Foreign Aid in 2005
187
Moreover, at the time of the debate on the new DPS, contradictions were apparent
in terms of the implementation of EC aid policy. The appointment of two
commissioners, one for external relations and the other for development, each with
their own conceptual frameworks and implementation structures, resulted in tensions
between two views regarding the EU’s role.12 One view, spelled out in the Council’s
three-year strategic programme in 2003,13 sees development cooperation as an
instrument to promote Europe as a global actor. The other view—held by the
Nordic+ group that includes Ireland—stresses that development is an end in itself,
that development cooperation is a policy in its own right and that aid funds should
not be used to finance other external policy objectives, such a fighting terrorism.
The new development policy will cover all developing countries and will be
implemented within a single framework of principles for the 25 member states and
the Commission. The DPS begins by declaring that the MSs and the European
Community are equally committed to basic principles, fundamental values and the
development objectives agreed at multilateral level. It reaffirms Europe’s
commitment to poverty eradication, ownership, partnership, delivering more and
better aid and promoting policy coherence for development. Development policy ‘is
a central goal by itself’ and is at the heart of the EU’s relations with developing
countries. The statement also asserts that, since development cooperation is a shared
competence between the EC and the member states, the EC’s own policy and
programme is complementary to the policies pursued by the member states.14
The second part of the new DPS sets out the new EC policy and clarifies the EC’s
role and its comparative advantages, ‘which enable complementarity with bilateral
policies of member states and other international donors’.15 It delineates a number
of headings under which the Commission can add value. These include: its presence
in almost all developing countries; its common trade, agriculture and fisheries
policies; its ability to promote policy coherence at EU level; its ability to facilitate
coordination and harmonisation; its experience in promoting democracy, human
rights and governance; and its ability to put into effect the principle of participation
of civil society, in cooperation with the Economic and Social Committee, which has
a role in facilitating dialogue with local economic and social interest partners in
African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries.
The second important development at EU level in 2005 was the announcement of
a major scaling-up of EU aid between 2006 and 2010. This planned expansion can
be traced back to the commitment to collectively increase ODA to 0.39% of GNI by
2006, which was made at the International Conference on Financing for
Development (FfD) in Monterrey, Mexico in March 2002. This had been coupled
with an individual commitment, for member states that had not yet reached the UN
target of 0.7% of GNI, to reach at least 0.33% in 2006. The EU defined its
contribution to the FfD commitments at the European Council in Barcelona on 14
March 2002 by making eight clear commitments (the ‘Barcelona commitments’). In
Rome, 24–25 February 2003, available at http://www.aidharmonization.org/ah-overview/secondarypages/why-RomeDeclaration (28 March 2006).
12The EU includes both the member states and the European Community, which was originally
founded under the name of the European Economic Community and now forms one of the three
‘pillars’ of the EU.
13European Council, Multiannual strategic programme of the Council 2004–2006 (Brussels, 2003).
14‘European consensus’, 2.
15‘European consensus’, 8
O’Neill.qxd
01/06/2006
188
17:59
Page 188
Irish Studies in International Affairs
addition to the targets for increasing the volume of ODA, these commitments refer
to strengthening aid coordination, further untying of aid, debt relief, global public
goods, trade-related assistance and new sources of financing. In 2005, the EU25
(including the ten countries that joined the Union in 2004) made a number of new
commitments. First, they committed themselves to reaching the UN target of 0.7%
of GNI by 2015. Second, as an interim step toward reaching that target, the EU15
member states promised to reach, by 2010, an individual baseline of 0.51% (with the
EU10 reaching 0.17%) of GNI, which would correspond to a collective result of
0.56% of ODA/GNI by 2010. The acceding countries—Bulgaria and Romania—
aligned themselves with these commitments. Finally, the EU also undertook to raise
aid to sub-Saharan Africa and to ensure that half of the envisaged collective aid
increases as of 2006 will be allocated to Africa.16
The EU budget for the period 2007–13 (called the ‘Financial Perspective
package’) was agreed in December 2005.17 Within the overall budget, it was agreed
that expenditure on external actions would increase annually by 4.5%, with an
overall ceiling of €50 billion. This is roughly the same share of the total (10%) as is
expended on such actions in the current budget. In addition, it was agreed that
€22.682 billion would be spent on cooperation with ACP countries between 2008
and 2013 under the tenth European Development Fund (EDF). If these expenditures
are confirmed, the real share of the EC’s contribution (from the EC budget and EDF)
to the EU’s collective ODA would fall from 20% at the beginning of 2006 to 15%
by 2010, and to 13% by 2013. Moreover, if the MSs honour their ODA pledges, they
will have to provide around 90% of the additional EU aid bilaterally.18
In 2005, member states also committed themselves to better coordinated and more
effective aid at EU level. Together with over 100 developing countries and donors,
they also signed the ‘Paris declaration on aid effectiveness’, which commits donors
to more predictable aid mechanisms, notably budget support, reducing duplication,
aid untying and reform of the international financial institutions. They also promised
to provide more trade-related assistance (TRA). At the G8 summit, the president of
the European Commission, José Manuel Barroso, pledged to increase EC aid for
trade to €1 billion per annum by 2010. In December 2005, the Council19 agreed that
MSs will strive to increase collectively their TRA to €1 billion per annum by 2010.
The combined EU contribution should thus reach €2 billion.
Also in December 2005, the European Council adopted a new EU strategy for
Africa. It is innovative in the sense that it is for the whole of the continent and that
it seeks to place the various Africa strategies and policies of the Commission and the
member states within a single framework. The main aim is to help Africa achieve the
millennium development goals (MDGs) by 2015. Since all reports to date suggest
that these goals will not be achieved for Africa, the EU’s Africa strategy aims to avert
such failure. Given that the strategy requires more resources, it is predicated on the
successful realisation of earlier decisions of the Council to provide more aid and
16Commission of the European Communities, ‘Communication from the Commission to the Council
and the European parliament. Financing for development and aid effectiveness—The challenges of
scaling up EU aid 2006–2010’, (Brussels, 2006), SEC (2006) 294, available at http://europa.eu.int/
comm/development/body/communications/docs/communication_85_2006_en.pdf (24 March 2006).
(Hereafter cited as ‘Challenges of scaling up EU aid’.)
17European Council, ‘Financial perspective 2007–2013’, 15915/05 CADREFIN 268, 19 December
2005.
18Commission of the European Communities, ‘Communication on scaling up EU aid’, 5.
19European Council, ‘Aid for Trade’, 15579/05 DEVGEN 2500 RELEX 748, 9 December 2005.
O’Neill.qxd
01/06/2006
17:59
Page 189
O’NEILL—Ireland’s Foreign Aid in 2005
189
more effective aid, to increase the speed of implementation and to direct increasing
amounts of aid to Africa. The strategy focuses on key requirements for sustainable
development, such as peace and security, good and effective governance, trade,
improved infrastructure (roads, railways, water, energy and information and
communication technologies), social cohesion and environmental sustainability. At
the implementation level, the strategy proposes to launch a number of initiatives,
including a ‘Governance initiative’ and a ‘Partnership for infrastructure’. Under the
governance initiative, the EU will provide support for reforms arising from the
African peer-review mechanism launched by the General Assembly of the African
Union within its new partnership for Africa’s development (NEPAD) in 2002. In the
context of the partnership for infrastructure, the EU will support programmes that
promote regional trade, integration, stability and development at continental level.
Global ODA flows
Data on official development assistance during 2005 had not been published at the
time of writing (March 2006). The most recent data available were the final figures
for 2004, published by the OECD/DAC in February 2006.20 These data confirm the
general upward trend in ODA suggested by the preliminary data published in April
2005 and reported in this review last year.21 Official aid from DAC donors, who
account for well over 90% of total ODA flows, amounted to US$79.5 billion in 2004,
up from US$69.1 billion in 2003. ODA has continued to rise in real terms each year
since the Monterrey FfD conference in March 2002, but at a rate below that needed
to reach what donors have promised for 2006. For 2001–4, ODA rose by 18% in real
terms, an average increase of over 5% per annum. The rate of increase needs to
double between 2004–6 to reach the 2006 projections. ODA is the main source of
external financing for low-income countries, nearly double their export earnings
(excluding oil). In contrast, trade provides middle-income countries with most of
their financial inflows from OECD countries, followed by foreign direct investment,
other private flows and emigrants’ remittances, all of which are greater than the
income these countries receive through ODA. Transfers by privately funded nongovernmental organisations rose from US$6.9 billion in 2000 to a record US$11.3
billion in 2004. ODA provided by official donors (governments of DAC member
states) to and through NGOs has also been on a rising trend, reaching nearly US$5
billion in 2004. Ireland spends a higher proportion of its ODA through NGOs than
any other DAC donor.
As regards the geographical distribution of ODA in 2004, sub-Saharan Africa
received 30% of all ODA, Asia received 27% and 10% went to both Latin America
and the Middle East. Low-income countries (where income is under US$826 per
head) received 56% of gross bilateral aid to countries; this is less than expected given
that these countries are home to three-quarters of the people living on less than a
dollar a day. Middle-income countries, which account for roughly 27% of those
living on less than a dollar a day, receive a larger proportion (42%) of total ODA.
Small countries receive far more aid per head than large countries. Fragile states,
where governments cannot or will not deliver core functions, receive less aid per
20Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, Development Assistance Committee
(OECD/DAC), Development cooperation report 2005 (Paris, February 2006).
21Helen O’Neill, ‘Ireland’s foreign aid in 2004’, Irish Studies in International Affairs 16 (2005),
281–318: 286–7.
O’Neill.qxd
01/06/2006
190
17:59
Page 190
Irish Studies in International Affairs
head than the normal poverty-plus-performance model would imply but are home to
one-third of the absolute poor, caught in a vicious cycle of conflict, poor governance
and poverty.
Over the past 15 years, education and health have received a steady 15% of all
ODA. Aid to strengthen government capacity had doubled to over 20% by 2004. Aid
to infrastructure fell from 26% in 1993 to 11% in 2003, recovering partially in 2004.
Aid to production, including agriculture, has halved over the same period to only
7%. Despite much discussion of budget support, general programme assistance, of
which it is part, had fallen by two-thirds to only 4% of ODA in 2004. Emergency
aid averaged 5% in the 1990s but has averaged 9% since then. The amount of traderelated technical assistance and capacity building, to help developing and the leastdeveloped countries to participate more efficiently in international trade, has
increased by 50% since the Doha trade negotiations got underway in 2001.
IRELAND’S FOREIGN AID PROGRAMME IN 2005
At the millennium summit held at the UN General Assembly in September 2000,
Taoiseach Bertie Ahern announced that Ireland would reach the UN target of 0.7%
of GNI by the end of 2007. Annual nominal target increases were also announced.
However, it became clear after a few years that very little progress toward reaching
the target had actually been made. In October 2004, the newly appointed minister of
state for development cooperation, Conor Lenihan, TD, formally conceded that the
target would not be reached by 2007. As already noted, a new date was set in
September 2005, when the taoiseach reaffirmed the government’s intention to meet
the target, this time by 2012. He promised that ODA would increase from €545
million in 2005 to €658 million in 2006 and €773 million in 2007, to reach an interim
target of 0.5% of GNI by 2007. At a news conference in UN headquarters on 14
September 2005, the taoiseach stated that this interim target was ‘binding’, adding
that ‘we now have it in the three-year budgetary cycle’.22
The members of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs welcomed
the new commitment. Deputy Liz O’Donnell, former minister of state for
development cooperation, described it as momentous. However, she expressed
concern that binding increases had been specified only for 2006 and 2007 and thus
that progress toward the new target could be influenced by budgetary constraints,
such as a slowdown in economic growth.23 In fact, she could have added that a very
fast rate of growth might also imperil progress—as two government ministers cited
in this review article last year made clear.24
If the 0.7% target is reached by 2012, the nominal amount of ODA that year is
likely to be around €1.5 billion. This would put ODA spending in the second rank
22Deaglán de Bréadún and Marc Coleman, ‘Taoiseach sets out new 2012 target date for aid’, Irish
Times, 15 September 2005.
23Paul Cullen, ‘Pledge on overseas aid “a momentous step”’, Irish Times, 21 September 2005.
24See O’Neill, ‘Ireland’s foreign aid in 2004’, 288, where it was stated: ‘On 17 October, the minister
for foreign affairs, Dermot Ahern, TD, stated that the reason the government found it so difficult to
reach the UN target was because of “the Republic’s rapid rate of growth”. In a Dáil statement the next
day, minister of state Lenihan said that the reason the 2002 and 2003 ODA figures were lower than
hoped was because of “the economic slowdown”. To compound the confusion, the minister for finance,
Brian Cowen, TD, stated on an RTÉ programme on 1 December 2004, that he was sorry Ireland was
not going to be able to meet the 0.7% target on time but “if there had been a recession, we would have
met it”’.
O’Neill.qxd
01/06/2006
17:59
Page 191
O’NEILL—Ireland’s Foreign Aid in 2005
191
of spending by departments, well below the departments of health, education and
social welfare to be sure, but on a par with spending on the defence forces and not
far behind the Department of Agriculture and Food.
Such a major scaling-up of Irish aid will require more staff. At present, the entire
ODA programme is operated with only 130 people: these include 30 diplomats, 16
specialist staff and 84 general service staff. Decentralisation of DCI to Limerick,
scheduled for late 2007, will create further pressure on existing staff, especially
specialist personnel, most of whom have indicated they do not intend moving to
Limerick.
THE BILATERAL SIDE OF IRELAND’S ODA PROGRAMME IN 2005
It is not possible to fully analyse expenditure under Ireland’s official aid programme
in 2005 since data were not available at the time of writing (March 2006).25 As a
result, the focus in this section is on three topics only: aid architecture and the
modalities of Irish aid, cooperation with civil society and expenditure on
emergencies and recovery.
Aid modalities and Irish aid to programme countries
Aid architecture—the way aid is delivered—has been changing significantly in
recent years. Change has been driven by a greater focus on poverty reduction as the
overarching objective of development cooperation, as well as by the need for greater
aid effectiveness, more country ‘ownership’, improved coordination among donors
and improved alignment of aid programmes with the development plans of partner
governments.
In the 1970s and 1980s, most Irish aid was delivered through projects. While they
have their advantages, these projects tended to be donor-driven and were not coordinated with the projects of other donors. Gradually, other modalities were
introduced. They include area-based programmes (ABPs), where donors assist local
communities by delivering part of their aid through local governments; and sectorwide approaches (SWAps), which put the government of the programme country
(PC) in the driving seat. The PC government prepares policy for a sector and a
number of donors pool their aid to that sector and adopt one set of accounts, one
audit and one evaluation. A relatively new modality is general budget support (GBS).
This involves a transfer of funds from a donor government directly into the
government budget of a PC to allow the latter to increase public expenditure or
reduce borrowing. The donor’s funds are merged with the PC government’s own
funds, spent through the PC government’s own financial systems, and managed
through the PC government’s public financial management procedures. Donors were
encouraged to move to GBS when the World Bank introduced its heavily-indebted
poor countries (HIPC) initiative in 1996. A precondition for HIPC support was the
preparation by the indebted country of a poverty reduction strategy paper (PRSP)
that provided a benchmark against which the budget could be judged when
appraising the viability of GBS.
DCI delivers over 40% of its bilateral aid budget to eight PCs (Ethiopia, Lesotho,
Mozambique, Tanzania, Timor Leste, Zambia, Uganda and Vietnam). Since 1993, the
25The date of publication of Irish Studies in International Affairs was brought forward in 2006 from
November to June. Normally, DCI supplies data to this writer in June or July.
O’Neill.qxd
01/06/2006
17:59
192
Page 192
Irish Studies in International Affairs
delivery of aid to these countries has been based on three-year country strategy
papers. Because each modality has disadvantages as well as advantages, DCI has
decided to take a mixed modalities approach in its country programmes and continues
to provide aid to its PCs in the form of projects, ABPs, SWAps and some GBS (to
Mozambique, Tanzania and Uganda). It also provides aid through civil society
organisations. In 2005, the eight PCs received €150.5 million in aid from Ireland. In
order of individual amounts, they received the following: Uganda €32 million;
Ethiopia €30 million; Mozambique €29 million; Tanzania €25 million; Zambia €18
million; Lesotho €9.8 million; Timor Leste €3.7 million and Vietnam €3 million.
South Africa, although not officially a PC, received €10.4 million in 2005.
Aid architecture will continue to evolve. The Paris declaration on aid effectiveness
calls for eliminating duplication of efforts and rationalising donor activities to make
them as cost effective as possible. Under this declaration, donors committed
themselves ‘to make full use of their respective comparative advantage at sector or
country level by delegating, where appropriate, authority to lead donors for the
execution of programmes, activities and tasks’.26 The debate is currently focusing
on how donors will operationalise comparative advantage and specialisation and how
a common framework for country strategy papers might be designed. Ireland fully
agrees with donor coordination but would favour coordination with all ‘like-minded’
donors (including Canada and Norway) and especially the Nordic+ group, rather
than coordination just at EU level. Specialisation and the avoidance of duplication
at sector level could mean withdrawing from some sectors in some partner countries
to which Ireland has been providing assistance for some years. There is what can
only be described as ‘donor congestion’ in some sectors, notably in education. One
way forward could be ‘delegated cooperation’ whereby one (lead) donor acts with
authority on behalf of one or more other donors who continue to provide finance, for
example, to a SWAp, but do not get involved in the delivery of the assistance or,
more critically, in a bilateral relationship with the partner government in relation to
that sector. An example of ‘harmonisation in reality’ is the joint assistance strategy
(JAS) being promoted by donors in Tanzania. Eventually, donor efforts to achieve
coherence and consolidation will result in a more rational division of labour and in
some donors giving up some sectors.
Cooperation with civil society
‘Civil society’ is a broad term. In general terms, it is the space between the household
and the state that includes registered charities, development non-governmental
organisations (DNGOs), community groups, women’s organisations, farmers’
organisations, faith-based organisations, professional associations, trades unions,
self-help groups, social movements, business associations, coalitions and advocacy
groups. DCI cooperates with DNGOs that share its commitment to poverty reduction
and equitable, sustainable development. They have to be non-profit organisations but
they can be involved in economic development provided it is on a cooperative basis
and any surpluses are invested back into the organisation. They should be voluntary
in nature and have sound governance structures.
Civil society activity cuts across DCI’s whole programme. A dedicated civil society
section was created inside DCI in 2004. However, NGOs are also supported within
country programmes, within the emergency and recovery programme and in the
26‘Paris
declaration’, 6.
O’Neill.qxd
01/06/2006
17:59
Page 193
O’NEILL—Ireland’s Foreign Aid in 2005
193
multilateral side of the Irish ODA programme. In 2005, DCI spent over €87 million
through development NGOs. Around three-quarters of this sum are provided to NGOs
based in Ireland. Some funding is also provided to NGOs in developing countries and
in Eastern and Central Europe. There is a separate programme for Central America
where the focus has been on strengthening civil society; the new policy being
developed for the region will focus on governance issues and on the promotion of fair
trade. Another scheme promotes human rights and democratisation worldwide.
Some donors provide 100% funding to NGOs but DCI does not favour this
approach believing that it creates undue dependence and threatens the sustainability
of the NGO sector. To date, the maximum funding provided by DCI for NGO
projects and programmes is 75%. The remaining 25% must come from their own
resources or from other sources. In the interests of maintaining the independence of
the NGO sector in Ireland, DCI is now considering an increase in the NGO
contribution.
The overall budget of €87 million spent through NGOs in 2005 supported a wide
variety of schemes. These included MAPS (a multi-annual programming scheme for
the five largest Irish NGOs); HAPS (a partnership scheme to support the short-term
institutional development of Irish NGOs in relation to HIV/AIDS programming);
Volunteer 21 to promote volunteering; the scheme to promote civil society in Central
America; a scheme to support in-country micro projects; and core funding for
Dóchas, the umbrella organisation for 35 Irish development NGOs. A final scheme
provides support for the Irish missionary resource service (IMRS), established in
2004, which manages funding for Catholic missionary organisations working in
developing countries. Although the number of Irish missionaries has been decreasing
steadily in recent years, the work of the remainder has broadened out from a major
focus on education to include work on water projects and livelihoods. In droughtprone Turkana in northern Kenya, for example, missionaries have been working with
local communities building dams.
With a view to rationalising the various existing schemes in support of civil
society groups and also to promote cooperation among them, DCI has established a
civil society fund with a budget of €20.7 million for 2006. Funding for some of the
smaller schemes, including HAPS, will be incorporated into this larger fund. Table
1 shows expenditure through civil society organisations in 2005 and the budget for
2006.
Table 1: Expenditure through civil society schemes in 2005 and budget for 2006
Scheme
2005
2006
MAPS
Civil society fund
IMRS
Personnel/volunteering/UNV
NGO grants/micro projects, etc.
Central America
HAPS
Other (including Dóchas)
Emillion
46.0
—
12.0
10.5
7.7
7.1
3.0
0.9
% total
53
—
14
12
9
8
3
1
Emillion
52.0
20.7
14.0
2.3
2.5
5.9
2.0
0.6
Total
E87.2
100
E100.0
% total
52.0
20.7
14.0
2.3
2.5
5.9
2.0
0.6
100
O’Neill.qxd
01/06/2006
194
17:59
Page 194
Irish Studies in International Affairs
Emergency and recovery assistance
Throughout 2005 the world witnessed a number of major disasters and emergencies.
The year began in the immediate aftermath of the Asian tsunami that left over
280,000 dead or missing. A devastating earthquake that hit Kashmir in October
killed an estimated 73,000, injured around 80,000 and left at least two million
homeless. The Atlantic hurricane season destroyed New Orleans and left thousands
dead, injured and homeless in the US and the Caribbean. In addition to these ‘sudden
onset’ disasters (tsunamis, earthquakes, hurricanes), 2005 also witnessed a number
of ‘slow onset’ disasters (chronic emergencies such as food and HIV/AIDS crises in
Niger and countries in southern Africa) and complex political emergencies
(including those in Darfur in Sudan, Democratic Republic of Congo and Nepal).
DCI has been increasing its assistance to areas suffering the effects of disasters
and emergencies at a steady rate since 2000. In that year, €11.8 million was provided
to ‘emergency and humanitarian assistance’ and a further €13.5 million to ‘postemergency rehabilitation and recovery’. Under these two separate headings, the
amounts provided in 2002 were, respectively, €20 million and €17.3 million; and in
2004, €24 million and €14.7 million. The names of the two funding ‘windows’ in
DCI have changed slightly over the period: the budgets for 2006 are €60 million for
‘emergency humanitarian assistance’ and €16 million for ‘emergency preparedness
and recovery’. In total, expenditure amounts to around 10% of Irish ODA. Although
there is a distinction between the two ‘windows’, the links between them are
important. Linking long-term development assistance into relief assistance is
emerging as a very important issue. Another concern in DCI is the number of
emergencies and crises that are arising in Ireland’s PCs in Africa. Donors, including
Ireland, are concerned that crises continue to emerge in countries to which they have
been providing long-term development assistance for years. The new focus is
avoidance of disasters and preparedness by addressing their causes before they occur.
This highlights the urgency of needs assessment. Even in the case of spectacular
disasters such as the Asian tsunami, huge amounts of assistance were inappropriate
because the needs had not been properly assessed in the immediate aftermath of the
disaster.
DCI is not an implementing agency in relation to disaster relief. Over 50% of its
contribution is channelled through international organisations such as the
International Red Cross and Red Crescent (ICRC) and the UN Office for the
Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA). Another 23% is distributed through
Irish NGOs and a further 22% through international NGOs. Ireland joined the
tsunami coalition and has been building up a number of strategic partnerships with
the key international organisations and Irish NGOs and has participated in a number
of joint evaluations.
As is the case with long-term development aid, bilateral donors, NGOs and
international organisations are increasingly coordinating their emergency assistance.
There is now international donor consensus on principles and good practice.
Included in the principles of good humanitarian donorship (GHD) is the recognition
that assistance should be impartial, humane, neutral, independent and flexible and
supportive of recovery and long-term development. Assistance should also support
and promote the central role of the UN, the ICRC and NGOs. DCI is able to respond
fast and flexibly to sudden onset disasters because it can normally carry over around
€5–€6 million from one year’s budget to another and thus has funds to respond
rapidly to such emergencies. When the tsunami struck, Minister of State Lenihan
O’Neill.qxd
01/06/2006
17:59
Page 195
O’NEILL—Ireland’s Foreign Aid in 2005
195
was able to provide a contribution of €1 million within 24 hours. In all, the
government provided around €20 million to the affected region in 2005, while the
general public, through Irish NGOs, provided nearly €80 million.
THE MULTILATERAL SIDE OF THE IRISH AID PROGRAMME IN 2005
The multilateral section of DCI deals with all development-related policy and
funding issues arising at the UN and at the Bretton Woods institutions (World Bank
group and IMF). Its officials prepare and co-ordinate Irish policy positions for major
UN summits in the economic and social spheres and on sustainable development. In
addition, they co-ordinate DCI policy positions in relation to development issues
arising at ECOSOC and its functional commissions, at the second committee of the
UN General Assembly and at the executive board of the World Bank. Officials in the
section attend the Commission on Social Development, the Commission on
Population and Development and the Commission on Sustainable Development.
Furthermore, DCI’s multilateral section staff provided input to the world summits on
the information society in 2003 and 2005 and co-ordinated the Irish input to the
Millennium+5 summit at the UN in September 2005. Finally, the multilateral UN
section manages the budget of voluntary contributions to UN and other international
development agencies.
Payments through the World Bank and International Monetary Fund
In partnership with the Department of Finance, the UN section of DCI prepares Irish
policy positions on issues at the World Bank group and the International Monetary
Fund. In addition to its contributions to the International Development Association
(IDA) and poverty reduction and growth facility, Ireland supports a number of World
Bank trust funds, including the World Bank Institute. Since 2002, Ireland has
supported 100% debt cancellation for HIPCs.
Ireland’s largest contribution to the World Bank group relates to the IDA, the softloan window of the bank. Quarterly payments to the IDA are made by the Department
of Finance. In total, €18.27 million was paid to the IDA in 2005. Negotiations on the
fourteenth replenishment of the IDA were completed in February 2005. Ireland has
undertaken to contribute €70 million to this replenishment.
In relation to the IDA, the Development Banks Act 2005 stipulated that quarterly
payments would henceforth be authorised by Dáil resolution rather than by primary
legislation as in the past. Essentially, this will circumvent the need for the
Department of Finance to go back to the Oireachtas each time a new replenishment
is agreed by IDA members. The resolution relating to 2006 will be laid before the
Oireachtas before the summer. Subject to Dáil approval, Ireland’s contribution to the
fourteenth replenishment (IDA 14) in 2006 will be €4.54 million. In addition, €15.2
million will be paid to IDA 13, making a total contribution to IDA this year of €19.7
million.
One of a number of innovatory approaches incorporated in IDA 14 is a major new
debt-relief scheme. Countries facing the worst debt problems—most of which are in
sub-Saharan Africa—will get their support under IDA 14 in the form of grants.
Ireland has undertaken to contribute around €59 million toward the cost of this new
multilateral debt-relief initiative (MDRI). Although the World Bank’s board had not
finally agreed it at the time of writing (March 2006), Ireland’s contribution will be
paid during 2006 in one lump sum in order to facilitate the immediate launch of the
O’Neill.qxd
01/06/2006
196
17:59
Page 196
Irish Studies in International Affairs
initiative. Speaking in his capacity as governor of the World Bank and the IMF for
Ireland at the 2005 annual meetings in September 2005, Minister for Finance Brian
Cowen, TD, reminded the boards of governors that Ireland had been one of the first
countries (in 2002) to support 100% debt cancellation for HIPCs. He welcomed the
announcement by the G8 finance ministers that they now supported 100%
cancellation of World Bank, African Development Bank and IMF debt owed by
HIPCs. However, Minister Cowen stressed that debt cancellation is not enough. ‘Our
objective must be to achieve long term debt sustainability while ensuring adequate
resourcing of the MDGs. This will require significant increases in grant ODA,
particularly by the larger economies’.27
Other payments made to the World Bank group and the IMF during 2005 included
€1.5 million to World Bank Education in Africa Trust Fund, €1 million to the World
Bank Consultancy Trust Fund, €0.41 million to the HIPC Trust Fund, €0.635 million
to the Poverty Reduction and Growth Facility and €1.1 million to the Global
Environment Facility (GEF).
The GEF is a financial mechanism for the international conventions on
biodiversity, climate change, land degradation and persistent organic pollutants.
Since its inception in 1991, GEF has provided US$5.7 billion in grants for 1,700
projects to conserve biodiversity, reduce the risks of climate change, safeguard
international waters, protect the ozone layer, promote sustainable land management
and eliminate toxic pollutants. GEF funds have leveraged an additional US$18.8
billion in co-financing from partners, including international organisations, the
private sector, NGOs and governments of developing countries. The World Bank
Group is one of GEF’s implementing agencies and supports countries in preparing
GEF co-financed projects and supervises their implementation. It plays the primary
role in ensuring the development and management of investment projects. In 2005,
the Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government (DOEHLG)
contributed €1.432 million to GEF. This represented the last payment under GEF-3.
The fourth replenishment of the facility is currently under negotiation. Although
political issues in the United States have delayed progress to date, the negotiations
will probably be completed during 2006. DOEHLG also contributed €317,000 to the
UN Environment Programme (UNEP) in 2005.
Joining the Asian Development Bank
Ireland will finally join the Asian Development Bank (ADB) this year. The
Development Banks Act was enacted on 21 December 2005 and it is expected that
the process of joining the ADB will be completed before its annual meeting in May
2006. In total, Ireland has agreed to contribute €8.5 million to the share capital of
the ADB, payable in four equal annual amounts of €2.1 million from 2006 to 2009.
Ireland will also contribute €23.1 million to the eighth replenishment of the Asian
Development Fund, €11.55 million to be paid in 2006 and €5.77 million to be paid
in both 2007 and 2008. A once-off contribution of €1.6 million will also be paid to
the ADB trust funds in 2006. The total payable to the ADB in 2006 will be €15.25
million.
27Department of Finance, ‘Statement by the minister for finance, Brian Cowen, TD, governor of the
bank and the fund for Ireland, at the joint annual discussion’, press release, 24 September 2005. The
minister’s statement was given during the 2005 annual meetings of the World Bank and IMF in
Washington, DC.
O’Neill.qxd
01/06/2006
17:59
Page 197
O’NEILL—Ireland’s Foreign Aid in 2005
197
Payments through the United Nations
Ireland’s contributions to various agencies and organisations within the UN have
been increasing strongly in recent years in line with the general growth in the ODA
budget. All these contributions are voluntary.
The number of agencies receiving contributions had been increasing throughout
the 1990s, but the 1999 DAC peer review of Ireland’s official aid programme had
suggested a more selective and targeted approach should be adopted if these
contributions were further expanded. The 2002 report of the Ireland Aid review
committee supported this recommendation and further suggested entering into
‘strategic partnerships’ with a small number of agencies ‘whose policies and
priorities fit well with those of Ireland Aid and which have made a tangible
contribution to the alleviation of poverty and suffering’.28 DCI developed a set of
criteria to identify UN agencies with which to negotiate partnership agreements with
non-binding, indicative, multi-annual funding commitments.
In 2005, Ireland contributed €47 million to UN agencies. The budget for 2006 is
around €63 million. Ireland’s contributions accounted for about 0.5% of the UN
agencies’ budgets in the late 1990s. Today its contribution accounts for about 0.75%
of their budgets.
The largest share of funding to these agencies went to the UN Development
Programme (which received €14 million in 2005), the UN Children’s Fund (€9.2
million) and the UN High Commission for Refugees (€8.9 million). Contributions to
these three agencies were provided to their core budgets, allowing the agencies
themselves to determine spending priorities. Among the other UN agencies that
received contributions exceeding €1 million in 2005 were: the World Health
Organisation (€4 million), the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human
Rights (€2.95 million) and the UN Fund for Population Activities (€2.92 million).
Other UN agencies that received contributions during 2005 included: the UN Office
on Drugs and Crime (€1 million), the UN Volunteers (UNV) (€860,000), the UN
Fund for Women’s Development (€690,000), the UN Environment Programme
(€500,000) and the UN Junior Professionals Programme (€492,000). Among smaller
amounts contributed to other UN agencies were €294,000 to the UN Industrial
Development Organisation and €225,000 to the UN Country Coordination Fund
(UNCCF). DCI contributed to the UNCCF for the first time in 2005; the fund is
operated by the UN Development Group to facilitate coordination at country level of
UN funds and programmes. The UNDG uses the ‘Fund for the Resident Coordinator’
system and is involved in the alignment of UN programming frameworks with
national plans and planning processes.
Ireland also contributes to the Global e-Schools and Communities Initiative
(GeSCI) that was founded by the United Nations information and communications
technology (ICT) task force. That task force, in turn, was a product of the world
summit on the information society that was held in two phases, the first in Geneva
in 2003 and the second in Tunis in 2005. GeSCI (which is based in the Department
of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources in Dublin) works at local,
national and international levels, to support developing countries as they create and
deliver strategies to harness ICTs for education and community growth. In 2005,
DCI contributed €1 million to GeSCI.
28DFA
(Ireland Aid), Report of the Ireland Aid review committee (Dublin, 2002), 58, 60.
O’Neill.qxd
01/06/2006
198
17:59
Page 198
Irish Studies in International Affairs
In addition to DCI and the Department of Finance, a number of other government
departments also make annual contributions to UN agencies and other multilateral
institutions. The most important contributor in this regard is the Department of
Agriculture and Food (DAF). During 2005, it contributed over €7 million to the
World Food Programme (WFP). This total payment consisted of €4.476 million in
voluntary contributions to the WFP, €1.523 million to the Food Aid Convention, €1
million in emergency food aid support for Niger, and €176,000 in special operation
helicopters used in recovery following the Pakistan earthquake. In addition, DAF
paid €923,000, representing its annual subscription, to the FAO’s general budget
(51% of which may be counted as ODA under DAC rules).
DAF also provided support for three FAO projects. It contributed €150,000 to the
FAO national forestry programme facility, which aims to integrate sustainable forest
management into broader inter-sectoral processes with a strong focus on poverty
reduction. This facility also seeks to build consensus at national level on how to
address forest-related issues and integrate international commitments into national
forest policy and planning. DAF also paid €100,000 to FAO’s Codex training
courses, which are focused on the use of risk analysis in food safety, microbiological
risk assessment and strengthening food safety in the small business sector in subSaharan Africa and Asia. A sum of nearly €34,000 was contributed toward the cost
of a major independent external evaluation of FAO’s work due to begin this year.
Finally, DAF provided over €286,000 to the UN young professional officer schemes
of the FAO and the WFP.
Other government departments that contributed to UN and other multilateral
organisations during 2005 included the Department of Environment, Heritage and
Local Government (to the International Atomic Energy Agency, UN Environment
Programme, Multilateral Fund of the Montreal Protocol and UN Framework
Convention on Climate Change); the Department of Health and Children (to WHO);
the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment (to the ILO and World
Intellectual Property Organisation); the Department of Defence (to the ICRC); the
Department of Education and Science (to UNESCO); and the Department of
Communications, Marine and Natural Resources (to the International
Telecommunications Union).
Following the Millennium+5 summit at UN headquarters in New York in
September 2005, a ‘Peace-building fund’ and a ‘Democracy fund’ were established.
Ireland will provide support for these funds in 2006.
Payments through the EU
Ireland is assessed under two headings in relation to its contribution to the European
Commission’s own aid programme. First, it pays an assessed amount to that part of
the overall EU budget that is spent on development cooperation (including food aid,
emergency and humanitarian assistance and aid to the Mediterranean area, Latin
America, Asia and other non-ACP states). The Department of Finance makes these
payments out of the Central Fund or, more correctly, it is netted out by the
Commission from the total of inflows and outflows of annual payments between
Ireland and the EU. In 2005 around €52 million was paid to the development part of
the EU budget.
The second contribution to the EU is paid by DCI and represents Ireland’s
assessed payment to the European Development Funds (EDFs) that have been
financing the Lomé Conventions between the EU and the ACP countries since 1975,
O’Neill.qxd
01/06/2006
17:59
Page 199
O’NEILL—Ireland’s Foreign Aid in 2005
199
and the EDF of the Cotonou Convention signed in 2001. During the negotiations on
amendments to the latter convention that took place during 2004–5, the issue of
‘budgetising’ the EDF was debated. Ireland was among those MSs that argued in
favour of the EDF being ‘ring-fenced’ and not brought within the EU budget. The
Council of Ministers later agreed not to budgetise the EDF. Around 90% of the EDF
is spent in the poorest, least-developed countries. In contrast, only around 45% of
the development part of the EU budget is spent on such countries. DCI paid €15.7
million into the EDF in 2005. It also made payments totalling over €1.9 million to
the European Investment Bank in respect of the EDF last year.
MENTORING PROGRAMME FOR NEW EU MEMBER STATES
The ten new member states of the EU are obliged to take on the acquis on
development and are also obliged to meet the agreed target for ODA of 0.17% of
GNI by 2010. When they joined the Union in 2004, all of these new members except
the Czech Republic were providing less than 0.1% of GNI. According to the latest
available data from the OECD/DAC,29 the Czech Republic provided 0.11%, Slovakia
provided 0.07%, Hungary provided 0.06% and Poland provided 0.05% of GNI in
2004. A group described as ‘Other donors’ (which includes Estonia, Latvia and
Lithuania) provided on average 0.05% of GNI in 2004. Poland, Hungary and
Slovenia provided aid to developing countries before 1989 but budgetary constraints
during the transitional years up to 2004 led to the demise of their aid programmes.
As a result, the new MSs are confronted by significant challenges in developing
bilateral aid programmes, having little knowledge or experience of meeting DAC
best practice guidelines.
In February 2005, Minister of State for Development Cooperation Conor Lenihan,
TD, held a breakfast meeting with ministerial counterparts from the new MSs on the
margins of the informal meeting of development ministers in Luxembourg. At that
meeting, he suggested that Ireland would be willing to set up a mentoring
programme for development officials from interested new MSs. The objective of this
capacity-building initiative would be to pass on lessons that DCI has learned from
building up its own aid programme over a period of more than 30 years.
The first four delegations visited DCI between autumn 2005 and spring 2006.
They were: Lithuania (26–28 September 2005), Hungary (7–9 September 2005),
Poland (13–15 February 2006) and the Czech Republic (6–8 March 2006).
Delegations from Cyprus, Slovakia and Malta will come later in 2006.
Each visit lasts for about two-and-a-half days, during which heads of sections in
DCI make presentations on their work and answer questions posed by the visitors.
Topics examined include: the evolution of Ireland’s bilateral aid programme; aid
modalities and aid effectiveness; emergency and recovery assistance; selection and
management of projects and programmes; cooperation with civil society; evaluation
and audit; public information and the forthcoming White Paper on development
cooperation; development education; the work of the advisory board to DCI; and the
multilateral side of Ireland’s aid programme, including EU policies and programmes.
Heads of visiting delegations also make a presentation on their own country’s
evolving experience in development cooperation. Each visit includes a courtesy call
on the minister of state. A visit to Dóchas is also included in the programme, during
29OECD/DAC, ‘ODA from non-DAC donors’, Development Cooperation Report (Paris, 2005),
Statistical Annex, Table 33.
O’Neill.qxd
01/06/2006
200
17:59
Page 200
Irish Studies in International Affairs
which the director makes a presentation on the Irish NGO sector and the work of
Dóchas and of CONCORD, the European NGO Confederation for Relief and
Development.
DCI is interested in following up the mentoring visits with cooperation on the
ground with the new MSs. Such cooperation is currently being explored in two
geographical areas: Eastern Europe (where the new MSs have the comparative
advantage in terms of experience in such countries as Ukraine and Moldova) and
sub-Saharan Africa (where Ireland has wide experience from which the new MSs
can learn).
WHITE PAPER ON DEVELOPMENT COOPERATION POLICY
Shortly after his appointment in autumn 2004, Minister of State Lenihan announced
the government’s intention to publish a White Paper on development policy. Minister
Lenihan said this would provide an opportunity to engage in a broad public
consultation regarding the future direction of the government’s development
cooperation programme. Given that the taoiseach has announced since then that
Ireland would reach the UN target for ODA of 0.7% of GNI by 2012, the publication
of a White Paper outlining government policy and spending priorities for an
expanded programme is particularly appropriate and timely.
A wide-ranging consultation process was launched. This provided opportunities
for members of the public and NGOs to provide both written and oral contributions
to a broad-ranging debate on Irish development cooperation policy. A notice was
placed in the press, a dedicated website was set up and written submissions were
invited from all interested parties. A series of public meetings, eleven in all, was held
in cities and towns throughout the country (two in Dublin, one each in Cork, Galway,
Limerick, Waterford, Athlone, Tralee, Dundalk, Letterkenny and Carrick-onShannon). NGOs and other stakeholders were also invited to a consultative forum in
Dublin Castle in October 2005. Consultations took place within DCI and with
representatives of other government departments. An inter-departmental steering
committee was established. (This committee may become permanent, since many
departments other than foreign affairs are also involved in delivering ODA and there
is need for coherence between their policies as well as consultations regarding their
individual ODA payments). The minister of state also held high-level consultations
with UN representatives in New York.
Over 120 written submissions were received from individuals and organisations.
The main issues that dominated these submissions and the public meetings included
the following:
•
•
•
•
the UN ODA target of 0.7% of GNI and the need to ensure that it is met
by 2012;
policy coherence among government departments;
governance issues, including corruption and human rights abuses in
programme countries (It is intended that a policy on governance will be
published simultaneously with the white paper.);
public engagement with the ODA programme (There is a high level of
awareness of the work of NGOs but little knowledge about the official
aid programme and of the work of DCI—whose name was not
considered self-explanatory.);
O’Neill.qxd
01/06/2006
17:59
Page 201
O’NEILL—Ireland’s Foreign Aid in 2005
•
•
•
•
201
a clear need for more information on the official programme and for the
development of an appropriate communications policy was identified at
all the public meetings;
decentralisation of the development cooperation division of DFA to
Limerick;
in-migration to Ireland; and
tied aid. Participants were assured that Irish aid is untied and will remain
so.
It is intended that the white paper will be published around the middle of this year.
In order to encourage the Irish public to read it, it would be advisable to produce a
short paper. At the time of writing (March 2006) it appears that it will run to around
70 or 80 pages. In that case, two versions, one full and one condensed, will probably
be published.
PUBLIC INFORMATION ON IRELAND’S OFFICIAL AID PROGRAMME
The Information Unit in DCI is responsible for disseminating information about the
official Irish aid programme. The unit is responsible for all publications. It also
issues frequent press releases on the work of DCI. It publishes an e-newsletter every
two weeks and the website—which gets around three million hits a year—has been
restructured. Regular campaigns are organised (including the annual World AIDS
Day in December), visits by journalists to programme countries are arranged (either
on the occasion of ministerial visits or alone), and the Media Challenge Fund
provides grants for print journalists and for subsidising TV programmes. In 2004,
RTÉ produced a series of six programmes on developing countries with DCI paying
for 51% of the cost. A DVD was produced from the series and this was shown at the
beginning of all the public meetings. However, given the fact that it was apparent at
the public meetings on the White Paper that the Irish public still has little knowledge
about the official aid programme, DCI has concluded that a dynamic new strategy
on public information, with a significantly increased budget, needs to be developed.
Moreover, given the commitment of government to significantly expand the ODA
budget up to and beyond 2012, it is imperative that the Irish public be informed about
the way in which the ODA budget is being spent and why it is being spent.
The production of a new communications policy will coincide with the
publication of the White Paper. Elements of this communications policy include the
following: a follow-up TV series is being produced in 2006 with RTÉ covering the
entire costs, and more attitude surveys are planned. A new organisation called
Connect, funded by DCI and Dóchas, has been established to help develop the
constituency for debate on ODA issues. It will make use of all the latest technologies
and work closely with all elements of the media. A new strategy for development
education, with a focus on the primary-school sector, is also being developed. One
of the most interesting initiatives is the plan to establish an information centre in a
major street in Dublin that will include two meeting rooms. Included in the wide
range of material available in the centre will be information on volunteering, which
continues to attract a large number of young Irish people.
The name given to Ireland’s official aid programme when it was established in
1974 was Irish Aid. This changed to Ireland Aid in 1999 and to Development
Cooperation Ireland in 2003. One clear message that emerged during the public
O’Neill.qxd
01/06/2006
202
17:59
Page 202
Irish Studies in International Affairs
meetings on the White Paper was that DCI as a name for the official aid programme
has gained very little recognition. On 27 February 2006, the programme was
renamed Irish Aid. Announcing the change, Minister of State Conor Lenihan said
that this name is ‘simple and straightforward: it explains what we do and is much
easier to understand’. He added: ‘Irish tax-payers will this year contribute over €730
million to helping some of the world’s poorest countries, and they have a right to
know how this is spent and to feel proud at what is being achieved on their behalf’.30
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I wish to thank officials in the Department of Foreign Affairs (Development
Cooperation Ireland/Irish Aid), the Department of Finance, the Department of
Agriculture and Food and the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local
Government for useful discussions and supply of data.
30DFA, ‘Government official aid programme is renamed “Irish Aid”’, press release, 27 February
2006.