Ireland's development aid commitment must remain a national imperative, writes Tom Arnold.
In September 2000, the Taoiseach, Mr Ahern, made a solemn promise to the international community and to the Irish people.
Speaking at the UN's Millennium Summit, he committed Ireland to reaching the UN target for overseas development assistance of 0.7 per cent of gross national product (GNP) by 2007. That commitment received - and retains - cross-party support within Ireland. In the 2002 general election, all major parties declared themselves to be committed to this target and received a mandate on this basis.
The Taoiseach's high-profile commitment was made at a summit which adopted a clear agenda for development - the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Ireland has signed up to these goals.
The goals - of which there are eight - set clear UN-mandated targets for reducing poverty, hunger, HIV/AIDS and other diseases, illiteracy, environmental degradation and discrimination against women. All targets are to be achieved by 2015.
It is no exaggeration to say that their adoption represents real hope for the poorest countries in the world. They are clear and easy to understand. They are tangible, achievable and measurable.
The UN Secretary-General, Mr Kofi Annan, and the head of the United Nations Development Programme, Mr Mark Malloch Brown, have set up a number of task forces to recommend the best strategies for achieving them.
The Task Force on Hunger, which I have recently been invited to join, is charged with devising a plan for how the world community is going to reduce the number of hungry and malnourished people from the current number of 800 million to 400 million by 2015. These various task forces are due to report by the end of 2004.
A clear agenda for development, as represented by the MDGs, brings clarity as to who is responsible if development is to be achieved.
Many developing countries must improve their standards of governance if they are to lay the foundations of development. In certain regions of Africa, conflict must be addressed if there is to be any prospect of development.
But even if the problems of governance and conflict were - magically - overcome in the morning, many developing countries are starting from a position of extreme poverty.
They have little capacity to pay for the health and education systems essential for long-term development. As an example, the health budget in Malawi in 2001 amounted to $8 per capita: the equivalent figure for our frequently criticised health system in Ireland in that year was $2,500.
If the MDGs are to be achieved, developed countries will have to double their aid commitment, from the current level of $55 billion to over $100 billion per annum.
At a UN meeting in Monterrey, Mexico, in March 2002, to discuss how the MDGs were to be financed, both the US and the EU made commitments to increase their aid budgets.
The US pledged another $5 billion a year on top of the $10 billion it was already giving; however even with this additional amount, this still leaves the US, providing just 0.15 per cent of its GNP, at the bottom of the international league. The EU is committed to reaching 0.39 per cent by 2006.
In Monterrey, Ireland restated its commitment to achieving the 0.7 per cent target by 2007. We gained considerable international kudos for this at the UN and among developing countries. The Taoiseach reaffirmed that commitment at the Johannesburg Summit on Sustainable Development in September 2002.
This year, Ireland will contribute 0.41 per cent of its GNP to ODA. If we are to reach 0.7 per cent by 2007, the percentage will have to increase in 2004 - a year in which there will be many competing calls for public resources and hard political choices to be made. So NGOs like Concern will be asked : "Why should the Government meet this target when many public services need improvement at home?"
My answer to this is threefold.
Firstly, I believe that the aid programme, in its current form, is making a significant difference to the lives of many of the poorest people in the world. While we have poverty in Ireland, it does not begin to compare with the daily reality in the countries where the Irish aid programme operates.
Ireland's wealth, in absolute terms and relative to other countries, has increased greatly in the last 10 years. From our own history and values, we can derive a simple moral imperative to devote a small but increasing proportion of our wealth to help the world's poorest people.
Secondly, the decision on meeting the aid target will reflect on how we see ourselves as a country and what role do we wish to play in the world. What values do we wish to be guided by and stand for in our international relations? Are we willing to build on deep values of solidarity as we fashion our place in a changing world order?
As one of the few countries committed to achieve the 0.7 per cent target, Ireland can play a disproportionate role in advocating a fairer and more equal world.
We have an opportunity to use our EU membership to shape its policy. One of the priorities for the Irish EU presidency in the first half of 2004 will be to encourage the EU to meet the funding commitments, entered into in Monterrey, to finance the MDGs.
If such exhortation were to coincide with a failure by our Government to move towards the 0.7 per cent target, it would completely undermine our credibility.
Thirdly, there is the matter of national self-interest. I believe that developing an effective aid programme and a proactive foreign policy in favour of a fairer world is in Ireland's longer-term interest, from both a political and economic perspective.
Some years ago, Ireland campaigned to get elected to the UN Security Council. To general surprise, Ireland got more votes than its two competitors, Italy and Norway. Our ministers and diplomats took deserved credit for a successful campaign, but a key factor was that they were cashing in the debts of honour and the store of goodwill towards Ireland which existed among the leaders and senior officials in many countries around the world, particularly in developing countries.
Those debts of honour were established over many decades through the work of our missionaries and educators, male and female, and in more recent decades, through the work of agencies like Concern.
From an economic perspective, we have one of the most open economies in the world. We have gained significantly from globalisation. Taking a medium to long-term perspective, Ireland can only gain by working to ensure that the poorest escape from their poverty.
In determining public policy, it is not always true that doing the right thing coincides with national self-interest. Aid policy is a clear case where interests and values coincide. The Government should stick to its commitments.
Tom Arnold is chief executive officer of Concern and has just been appointed to the UN Task Force on Hunger.