I ask the Tánaiste what is going on in the Department of Foreign Affairs. The senior Minister seems to want to jettison the PDs and replace them with Sinn Féin and the junior Minister wants to jettison the UN target for overseas development aid even before negotiations start with the Department of Finance.

The Tánaiste will know that the Taoiseach gave a solemn commitment at the UN Summit in 2000 that the target would be met by 2007. The mid-term target was 0.45%. It was not realised and only 0.41% was reached, but consistent progress was being made at that time. When the Government reversed engines after the general election of 2002 and broke every solemn promise into which it had entered, its first cut was €32 million from the budget for ODA. In the event, it turned out to be €40 million.

Yesterday at the Committee on Foreign Affairs, on a motion tabled by my colleague, Deputy Michael Higgins, there was all-party support for the timeframe to be reinstated and alarm to be expressed at the manner in which this matter is being handled by a Minister of State, admittedly still wet behind the ears. Was the Tánaiste consulted on this and did the Cabinet agree that we were departing from the target established and policed by former Minister of State, Deputy O'Donnell? The target was let slip since. Are the poor and hungry of the developing world now to be the subject of the latest cut by this Government in spite of a solemn commitment on which the Taoiseach campaigned across the world for votes from the African states to have this country elected to the Security Council? Will the Tánaiste state whether this target will now be reinstated?

The Government has not reneged on the target and it has made no decision to that effect. It took a decision prior to the Taoiseach's announcement at the United Nations in 2000 that we were committing ourselves to reaching that target. We are seventh in the world in terms of our spending on ODA and have increased our spending more than three-fold. When the Deputy was last in office, it was €142 million, and it is now just under €0.5 billion annually. The Government remains committed to substantially increasing our overseas development aid and to the poorest countries of the world.

A solo run again.

If the Tánaiste is rededicating the Government to achieving the target by 2007, I simply welcome it.

She did not say that.

However, she did not say that. The Minister of State responsible is present. The Tánaiste is now seeking to——

A friend of the Deputy's.

A close friend. She is now seeking to indicate that he was on a solo run. He is the Minister of State handling this issue. Before negotiations commence with the Minister for Finance and his Department, the towel has been thrown in on what was a solemn commitment. We have gone around the world quite properly boasting of our achievement in this regard. I know where we rank among the European states in terms of our contribution and we ought to be proud of it. There are particular historical reasons this is appropriate for Ireland. Is the Government rededicating itself to the timeframe for the achievement of our goal in this regard? We have not made the mid-term target and in 2004 we are likely to slip below the 2003 figure of 0.41%.

The Government committed to a certain percentage of ODA in the programme for Government, in Sustaining Progress and in this House, and the Taoiseach made a commitment at the UN summit. Is the Tánaiste reinstating that particular commitment and timescale? I am not seeking any prevarication from her in this regard.

As the Deputy acknowledged, we have probably slipped even below 0.41%. This is because of the growth in GNP. We would clearly reach it very quickly if we saw——

Give less because we have more.

Less is more.

That is actually the reality.

The wealthier will get richer.

No, there are large sums of money involved and there are also capacity issues, as everybody has acknowledged.

For six years, the capacity issue——

As I said, the Government has not reneged on the commitment we made in 2000.

The Tánaiste, on Deputy Rabbitte's question.

We are too rich to meet our commitment.

We will move on. I call on Deputy Sargent.

The Government cannot organise the hospitals and now it cannot——

We had no commitment when Deputy Michael Higgins was in power.

Allow Deputy Sargent without interruption.

We need clarity on a very important matter. From time to time we in this House claim to represent those who are disadvantaged. This is such a time when we will be asked to represent people, many millions of whom live on less than a dollar a day. It is strange that they often live in countries to which asylum seekers in this country are deported.

The Secretary General of the United Nations, Mr. Kofi Annan, will be in Ireland tomorrow. I am not sure if he has been following this debate but he will probably be thanking the Government for its commitment of 0.7% of GNP by 2007, clearly made by Cabinet decision. He will probably be thinking about the Taoiseach's speech at the UN millennium summit in New York in 2000 and his speech at the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg in 2002, at which he clearly stated the following:

The decline in global ODA in the 1990s is shameful, indefensible and inconsistent with the commitments given at Rio. I re-iterate Ireland's absolute commitment to achieving, by 2007, the UN target of spending 0.7% of GNP on Overseas Development Assistance.

The Taoiseach is away at present handing out sweets to children in Vietnam, which is very laudable, while at home the Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs, Deputy Conor Lenihan, is busy telling us that, in effect, the Taoiseach was fibbing and that the commitment was not a commitment at all but some kind of wish on his part. Deputy Conor Lenihan is also implying the Taoiseach misled the UN by appearing to give leadership regarding overseas development aid so we could secure a seat on the UN Security Council. This is a very serious matter in which the Tánaiste needs to take a leadership role.

The Deputy's two minutes have concluded.

It is important to reiterate that the Tánaiste has already stated the Progressive Democrats will not tolerate a change in Government policy. Is the lowering of our ODA target an incidence where she will not tolerate a change? Is the Progressive Democrats prepared to walk as a result?

What are they in power for?

As I stated, the commitment was made by Cabinet decision. When the Taoiseach made the announcement at the UN millennium summit in 2000 and subsequently at the World Summit on Sustainable Development——

Johannesburg.

——he was doing so on the basis of a Government commitment and decision. That decision has not been reneged on and has not been changed. We acknowledge, given our current position, that it will be difficult to reach the set target by 2007——

No.

——but the Government must sign on for multi-annual funding that is clear in this particular area. That is what I want to see.

It would not be difficult.

The Government did it four years ago. It is a question of whether the Tánaiste will commit once again to a figure of 0.5% of GNP by 2005, 0.6% of GNP by 2006, and 0.7% of GNP by 2007. That is what the people want to hear if this Government policy is to have any meaning at all. We know the National Roads Authority, for example, receives multi-annual funding. Is it not the case that overseas development aid should also be subject to it? Will the Tánaiste indicate to the development agencies that they will receive funding and that we will reach our target of 0.7% of GNP by 2007? I know the former Minister of State, Deputy O'Donnell, would want an answer to this. She has said there has been no champion of ODA in the Department of Foreign Affairs since 2002. Does the Tánaiste agree with this and, if so, will she rectify the problem?

Deputy Conor Lenihan should stand up.

There are many champions of ODA and I would like to think I am one. There are many people in this House——

The Tánaiste has failed for the past two years.

Allow the Tánaiste to continue without interruption.

I share the Deputy's view on multi-annual budgeting. It is important, for a host of reasons, that we have clear decisions on this matter. It is not good enough that we would not. My strong view is that we cannot abandon one commitment without having an alternative commitment.

Earlier this year and certainly when we dealt with the Estimates last year, we envisaged that we would meet the target of 0.41% this year. As it happens, because the growth rate is higher than envisaged, it will probably slip below that. These targets are difficult because they are based on predicting what growth rates might be at the time the Estimates are negotiated and to a large extent are a victim of our success. If the economy was in decline we would probably have reached it quite a while ago.

There is cross-party support for a strong commitment to additional resources and multi-annual budgeting in this area. As we approach the Estimates for 2005 the Government should bear that in mind. I hope we will.