THE European Union wants to support agriculture in developing countries, but undermines it, through the Common Agricultural Policy. The EU spends money on clearing land mines in developing countries, while its member states continue to sell them.
We give large amounts in aid and then take back 65 per cent more in debt repayments. We encourage "export led development" and maintain tariffs against such exports.
Although it doesn't phrase the above in such polemical terms, a paper in the just published Trocaire Development Review illustrates stark inconsistencies in the EU's approach to development.
The paper, written by that agency's policy analyst, Ms Maura Leen, points up what it calls "policy incoherencies" within the EU, and suggests remedies.
More importantly from the point of view of Irish policy makers, it points to a number of areas where the Government can make a difference during this State's presidency of the EU.
The Maastricht Treaty introduced mechanisms to safeguard the fight against poverty from negative aspects of other EU policies. Thus policies on agriculture, debt and trade should not contradict the aims of sustainable development and the alleviation of poverty in developing countries.
The treaty also insists on the gradual integration of the developing countries into the world economy.
Yet "the EU is not matching its fine words with its financial commitments", says Trocaire. A number of policy "incoherences" are identified
. The EU supports export led growth in the developing countries. It has extended certain trade privileges to 70 ACP (African, Caribbean, Pacific) countries. But while agreeing to gradually reduce tariffs on certain imports it has also reduced the volume of such imports eligible for this new liberal regime.
Duties on some agricultural products have been reduced but not on key products that compete with the EU, such as olives, wine and lemons.
. Under the Common Agricultural Policy, the EU overproduces products such as sugar and beef, as a matter of policy. These surpluses have been dumped on the markets of developing countries, undermining the local economy and producing a result directly opposite to the stated aim of EU development policy.
. EU humanitarian aid is being used to clear land mines in some developing countries. At the same time some EU member states are selling such land mines to the developing world.
. The European Commission has said "democratisation is ... an essential component of any anti poverty strategy in developing countries". Yet there have been inconsistencies in the withholding of aid from governments deemed not to adhere to principles of good governance.
In the case of Indonesia the Netherlands withdrew support while the French increased it. Zaire and Sudan have been subjected to swift measures in the past. But the chances of an oil embargo against Nigeria remain remote because of vested interests in relation to oil revenues.
. The EU's eighth European Development Fund will amount to just 65 per cent of the scheduled debt repayments from ACP countries between 1995 and 2000.
In other words, the EU will get back more in debt repayments than it puts in through this fund. In 1990 the EU's development commissioner proposed the cancellation of all debt to the EU from ACP countries. The European Parliament agreed the member states, particularly the UK and Germany, did not.
During its EU presidency Ireland can attempt to stimulate action to end a number of these inconsistencies.
In the second half of this year, for example, the Minister for Finance will present the statement on behalf of the EU at the annual meeting of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund.
"The Irish Government should press for a solution to the debt crisis, by advocating debt cancellation for severely indebted low income countries and using such funds on social expenditure," says the paper.
"The Irish presidency offers an opportunity to bring the situation in Africa back centre stage."
Without greater coherence between EU policies and those of its member states, "much of the benefit of an increased Irish aid programme could be dissipated or even lost."