I advise members of the constitutional requirement that they must be physically present within the confines of the Leinster House complex in order to participate in public meetings. I will not permit a member to participate where he or she is not adhering to this constitutional requirement. Therefore, a member who attempts to participate from outside the precincts will be asked to leave the meeting. In this regard, I ask any members participating via MS Teams that, prior to making their contribution to the meeting, they confirm they are on the grounds of the Leinster House campus.

Members and witnesses are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable, or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of the person or entity. If their statements are potentially defamatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks. It is imperative they comply with any such direction.

We have about an hour and seven minutes for this meeting. I welcome the Minister of State back. I also welcome what is almost, but not quite, a completely fresh round of officials. Those officials who are here for a second time today are equally welcome. This part of our meeting is to discuss the global Europe regulation. The format of the meeting is such that we will hear the Minister of State's opening statement followed by a session of questions and answers with members of the committee. I ask members to be particularly concise. One or two have asked to come in early. I was to be up first but I will cede my slot to Deputy Ó Laoghaire, who asked first. The Vice-Chair, Senator Garret Ahearn, will go immediately after Deputy Ó Laoghaire and then we will roll on with the original order, if that is acceptable to everyone.

It is great to be back. I missed you all deeply. I am very grateful for the invitation to appear before the committee to speak on the global Europe regulation. As the Cathaoirleach will be aware, the Commission published its proposals for the 2028-34 multi-annual financial framework, MFF, earlier this year. The global Europe regulation forms one part of this proposal and it contains the external action elements of the EU’s next long-term budget. An ambitious and well-funded global Europe regulation is essential for Europe. This is a message that Ireland will continue to send during negotiations.

We are living in dramatically changed international circumstances. Traditional partnerships that were once guaranteed have evolved. Conflict and threats to security, both globally and at our borders, are now ever present. Our commitments to address poverty, gender inequality and climate disasters continue to demand swift action. From our perspective, global Europe must enable us to address these fundamental demands, which are intrinsically linked to our values and commitments to human rights, peace and security.

Allow me to set out some of the key priorities for Ireland on the global Europe proposals. First, it is clear that the proposal represents a significant merger of major instruments in external action, namely, enlargement, neighbourhood, development co-operation and humanitarian assistance. It will therefore be essential that interactions between these distinct priority areas are well identified and clearly assigned. With the many other demands on the EU budget, from agricultural to competitiveness ambitions, it is fundamental that the EU’s leadership in providing development and humanitarian assistance in a sustained and long-term manner with global partners is not underestimated. There are a number of areas which are very welcome in the development and humanitarian space, including the proposed target that 90% of global Europe expenditure should be on official development assistance. However, Ireland has called on the Commission to ensure that there is dedicated funding for humanitarian assistance and, in particular, that EU funding will continue to support multilateralism and the international legal order, human rights, governance, climate and gender equality. In line with the priority the Government attaches to sub-Saharan Africa, we are calling for a particular focus on the least developed countries and fragile states.

Second, the ongoing illegal invasion of Ukraine by Russia demands our collective response. This is reflected in the proposal, which provides a strong commitment to Ukraine. The ambitions align with Irish priorities in providing sustained and significant EU financial, political and military support for Ukraine. The balance must be struck between predictability and flexibility to allow us to effectively respond to Ukraine’s evolving needs and to support recovery and reconstruction. This is ultimately an investment in European security. Ireland views it as fundamental that EU funding in the Middle East is maintained under the next MFF. This includes funding in support of activity in Palestine, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Yemen and Egypt. In particular, this should focus on ensuring predictable and sustainable financial resources are in place to deliver on the realisation of a two-state solution. All of this has been set out in our proactive engagement with the Commission and other member states. In doing so, we have sought to ensure our traditional policy of military neutrality is well understood and appreciated in the MFF.

Third, the global Europe proposal also calls for clear supports for candidate and potential candidate countries to the EU. Ireland remains a strong supporter of EU enlargement, which is a geostrategic investment in the EU’s peace, security, stability and prosperity. The last half-century of EU membership has transformed Ireland's economy and society and amplified our global influence. We believe every European country deserves the same opportunity, provided it meets the necessary criteria for membership. We believe that enlargement will only make our Union stronger in a world defined by uncertainty and turbulence, not least in the global trading environment that has now fundamentally changed.

In this era of continuing unpredictability, Ireland and the EU must continue to provide values-based and practical leadership. Europe’s external action policy under global Europe must provide effective development co-operation, humanitarian assistance and enlargement support and do so in line with our commitments in the European treaties. As negotiations on the global Europe regulation progress, the Government will continue to make the case for an effective framework to ensure Ireland and the EU’s integrity as a strong and reliable partner. I look forward to members' questions.

I will keep my comments relatively general given that the opening statement was also relatively general. I hope the Minister of State will be able to give me some more specifics. I understand that this is at a reasonably early stage of development, although not at the very initial stages. From reading the statement, it seems to be a mixed bag. Co-operation, overseas development aid and so on are important but external action covers a multitude of areas. In layman's terms, it is the foreign policy of the EU. To my mind and, I expect, to the minds of most Deputies, it is very important that Ireland and every member state retains its own independent foreign policy. That remains the case. As this is fleshed out, that will be crucially important. Some of it will probably come down to the detail. I suppose that is my first question. What is the timescale for the further development of this? Aside from aid and assistance to allies such as Ukraine, what are we talking about and what will this actually mean in practical terms?

First and foremost, foreign policy is a competence of EU member states. It is enshrined as such and that is not changing. However, the EU is an external actor. That is why we have the European External Action Service and why the EU works at a global scale in many different areas. Among the strongest actions of the EU are the provision of official development assistance and humanitarian assistance around the world and establishing in-country offices around the world.

A vote has been called. The Minister of State will have three minutes when we return unless he wants to chance one more minute of a response now.

I would like to give the Deputy the full three minutes.

The Minister of State has three minutes left in response to Deputy Ó Laoghaire.

Gabhaim buíochas leis an gCathaoirleach. I wanted to go into the timeline as the Deputy has laid it out in relation to the agreement on global Europe and, more widely, the MFF. In relation to the discussions, it was discussed for the first time this month, where we set out our very clear positions on humanitarian and development assistance, as I laid out. The discussion on the cross-cutting elements of the regulation will also form discussion at the General Affairs Council in December where the Minister of State, Deputy Thomas Byrne, will attend and provide Ireland's overarching position. At a technical level, discussions on the regulation are taking place at pace in the ad hoc working party, AHWP, global Europe subgroup. Since mid-September, this group has reviewed details of the regulation in clusters, providing both written and oral comments on the provision. A first compromise text on this regulation is expected in December.

Then you get into a wider agreement on the global Europe regulation, leading in to the MFF.

This is where I have to be very delicate. I cannot give the Deputy an exact timeline for when that will be agreed. We know it has to be agreed by midway through 2027. We have the Danish Presidency coming to a conclusion, which will be followed by the Cypriot Presidency in the first half of next year, then the Irish Presidency and the Lithuanian Presidency in the first of half of 2027.

You think things can be a bit slow and bureaucratic here, but there are many legs to the processes in the European institutions. There is commentary on investment in European security and respect for neutrality. That obviously implies that this measure could involve military expenditure of some shape or form. From Sinn Féin's point of view, we are very clear that there is a need for investment in our Defence Forces but that should be a decision taken by an Irish Government independently and according to our own needs and priorities. We would have a watchful eye on any regulations that have military dimensions in terms of expenditure. Have we any sense of what that would look like in the context of this particular legislation? The stuff on overseas development aid, enlargement and support where appropriate and proportionate are fair enough. However, we would have to have a watchful eye in relation to that. What exactly does that mean in the context of financial expenditure of any kind on the military?

It is important to state that as with previous external actions of other versions of the MFF such as the NDICI, Ireland's military neutrality is not affected by the provisions of global Europe. The focus of the global Europe instrument is on the civilian and humanitarian aspects of external engagements. It focuses on humanitarian assistance, democratic governance, restructuring, climate action, promotion of rule of law principles and long-term development co-operation. All of these reflect the core values of Irish foreign policy that we can all agree to, regardless of party. We ensure that at every level our policy of military neutrality is well understood and appreciated. As I have discussed at length with regard to Ukraine, none of our contributions ever goes to any military hardware, lethal or otherwise.

My time is up, and I need to leave and do not want to eat into other people's time. Will the Minister of State respond in writing? He has outlined the relationship between Ireland and the EU. In the global European sense what is the resolution likely to mean in terms of military expenditure? What is anticipated?

At the Chair's discretion, defence is a matter, like foreign policy, which is primarily a responsibility for member states. Ireland has been clear about that. That is why we have increased our own spending on security and defence. Within the global Europe instrument, it is not expected to be a large-scale defence spending instrument. That is not the aim of it. It is about Europe's role in terms of humanitarian ODA and things like that.

The EU commitment on ODA is helping least developing countries and more fragile states. What is the EU position on the cutbacks we see everywhere?

I thank the Deputy for this pertinent question. I know Senator Stephenson has raised this in other forums. It goes to the crux of this global Europe regulation. That is why we welcome the commitment that upwards of 90% of global Europe will be committed to that humanitarian aspect. I have been loud, some would say obnoxiously so, in this forum, in the Seanad, the Dáil and at European level that I am worried about the European broadest approach to international development at the moment where member states are cutting their budgets. There will be huge pressure put on the European Union with regard to development by certain member states. Ireland is very strong that we expect the European development budget to be maintained. It has to be maintained in the current climate when we see such removals of capital from the development infrastructure. We talk a lot about USAID and understandably so. Over 20% of global development comes from the US, but over 40% comes from the EU and its member states and we will be facing quite a difficult path as these negotiations go on. However, Ireland's position is really clear that we expect a strong part of global Europe to continue to be towards humanitarian assistance to development and we will be going into these discussions and negotiations clear that is what we want to deliver as part of the overall MFF in due course.

I turn to the occupied territories Bill. Will the Minister of State give us a Government update?

We discussed this a little at the previous session of the select committee and, as was outlined in the Dáil today, the occupied territories Bill continues to be a priority for the Government. We accepted a Private Members' motion from the Opposition on it last week or the week before in the Dáil. The Deputy can correct me. I think he may have spoken on it. We have made it quite clear that we are awaiting the final legal advice from the Attorney General to make sure this is binding. This is something we know the Irish people expect from the Irish Government. Deputy Brennan and I signed up to a programme for Government committed to that. We will deliver it. The new Minister for foreign affairs remains as committed to it as the outgoing Minister and I expect it to be coming soon.

Does the Minister of State have a timeline on that?

I do not have a precise timeline. Unfortunately, when you are dealing with legal advice it can an extremely difficult process. It has been far more difficult than I would have expected. I say that as a layman who is not a lawyer. I know the new Minister for foreign affairs already made it clear last week on the national broadcaster that her priority is to get this to the Dáil for its next stage as soon as possible.

I am sorry I missed the Minister of State's opening statement. I know we are celebrating the 60% commitment but is that down from 93% in the overall package? That is my understanding.

Yes, 93% is the current one. It is down marginally.

I know he would support it, but it is about how we continue pushing for that from the Irish perspective. It is also not legislated. It is not enshrined in legislation, so there is the possibility through delegated acts that it could be reduced at country level. That would be something else. I know that is not necessarily-----

That is something we do not support, and we will be pushing to change that as part of the negotiations.

Brilliant. I am asking about things I have seen, and it would be lovely to hear exactly where the Minister of State stands. We are seeing this general trend of the prioritisation of EU interests over what we would traditionally call development co-operation. International partnerships was called development co-operation and then it became international partnerships. It feels like we are more than ever moving away from traditional aid partnerships and seeing language about conditionalities on aid, particularly as it relates to migration. Coming from the background I do I find that horrifying and it would be interesting to hear how the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade and the Minister of State are pushing back against that narrative in Europe.

I thank the Senator. I hope we will be ad idem for most of this exchange. My first job in politics was working as an adviser to a Member of the European Parliament on the development committee on the development and co-operation instrument. Trying to get any coverage of it was negligible because we were consistently increasing it in line with the values of the European Union, which were shared values of a then 28-state union, making sure those values were global. At European level Ireland has been very clear, along with our friends from Spain, in particular, but also Denmark to an extent, that there should not be this transaction-based language applied to development. There should not be this level of conditionality. We can justify development spending to a domestic audience through a range of means. We have to be clear with people that development is an investment. It is an investment from donor countries. It should not be seen as charity or anything like that. Equally, it should not be seen as conditional towards trade or something like that. It is the right thing to do. It is both the selfless thing to do and the selfish thing to do. At European level we will be making the case at the development formations of the foreign affairs council and with likeminded states that we need to maintain a clear development co-operation aspect. We have to continue that level of investment in development as well as humanitarian and it should not be some sort of barter system.

How hopeful is the Minister of State for that in terms of the new framework? Does he think that will be reflected? It is a 27-member union. I appreciate that it is not always easy to get those kinds of principles above the line, but I looked at the Commission 2026 workplan yesterday.

Fundamental rights were mentioned once in the entire document and only in relation to rule of law and democracy in Europe. It was completely missing in the global piece. That was really concerning for me as well.

I am far more hopeful than I was six months ago when I attended the Foreign Affairs Council. To be quite frank, I was aghast at some of the interventions I heard from other member states, ones we would traditionally associate with development, and the changing political dynamic in some of those countries. Thankfully at least one of those Ministers has subsequently lost their seat, but I will not go into detail. I am a bit more hopeful but I am under no illusion that this is going to be a real battle. I really want to underline that this is a battle that I as Minister of State and the Government as a collective and a body politic are really up for. I intend to utilise our Presidency of the Council of the European Union. Stakeholders will be joining me in about ten days' time in the Department of foreign affairs to discuss how we make this central to our Presidency. We are facing an existential crisis in international development. We have the opportunity as well as the responsibility to play the leading role we have played historically.

I would love to see Ireland fighting for the explicit ring-fencing of funding for human rights, democracy, gender and civil society, because that is not the case. I am sure the Minister of State will agree with me. I think the LIFE programme is going to be dismantled. It is important for civil society organisations' funding around climate change in Europe, for example. All of those things point to a move away from ring-fencing this space for civil society both in Europe and more broadly. It is a really concerning trend for me. It is also linked to funding advocacy activities internationally and in Europe. Without that, we are not hearing what is happening on the ground.

I agree with the Senator fundamentally. That is why we make sure our own Irish Aid programme has funding for human rights defenders and civic society organisations, primarily in our programme countries, such as Liberia and Zimbabwe, which I have visited in recent months. We will continue our commitment and of course add our voice at European level.

I apologise for missing the Minister of State's opening statement and thank him for his contribution so far. In what way are Ireland's development priorities and humanitarian principles in areas like food security, education and gender equality reflected in the EU programming? Are there areas where Ireland believes the regulation requires adjustment or a stronger focus?

The draft that we have of the regulation is fairly reflective and consistent with Ireland's priorities. We have welcomed this draft regulation. As I pointed out to Senator Stephenson, we now have to embark on a negotiation for the wider MFF but specifically for this regulation. We would be very keen and clear to defend the 90% commitment to official development assistance and make sure that focus remains on humanitarian principles. It will be a difficulty; I will not lie. There are actors at government and parliamentary level across the Union who would like to water down this regulation. Ireland will very much be pushing back against this to make sure we can secure it.

The regulation commits at least 30% of funds to climate action. Is this target being met in practice? How is climate finance being directed to vulnerable countries most in need?

We can talk about this on a European level and on an Irish level. This year we will meet our climate finance commitments. We can have a parallel argument as to whether they were ambitious enough but we have met what was set. We are a bit of an outlier in that we always target the least developed countries first in line with Ireland's development policy of reaching the furthest behind first. That also includes small island developing states, which contribute the least to the climate emergency but suffer the most from it. I have seen that in a very practical sense in regions that are dealing with changing rainy season patterns, drought, fires and that sort of thing. We are working on the ground in terms of both mitigation and adaptation. Certainly Ireland will be very keen to make sure that any regulation at European level continues to be strong. Again, there are actors who will seek to water this down and we will have to push back against that.

I welcome the approach the Minister of State has indicated. I certainly would support the idea of there being a strong focus on these issues in the Presidency. I would ask that it would be a named priority. It is an area where Ireland has a particular perspective to bring. The sustainable development goals do not feature strongly in the global Europe piece, unfortunately. Ireland had a key role as co-chair in the negotiation of those goals. It is a key area where Ireland can bring something particular and can act as a bridge. The Minister of State mentioned the multilateral system in his opening statement in respect of funding and support for multilateral systems such as the UN, the International Criminal Courts, UN Women and UNICEF. Europe plays a role in these systems but they reach beyond that as well. Ireland can be the bridge on that. I would love if that was an explicit part of the focus. Rather than relying on the Minister of State to advocate within rooms of Ministers, it should be part of the public focus for Ireland.

I am concerned about the €14.8 billion that is in the emerging challenges and priorities cushion. There is a huge amount of discretion going to the Commission. They can use that €14.8 billion without approval, by simply informing the Parliament and Council. I am also concerned that a lot of the hard targets that were previously in place, like the 30% climate target, are now indicative. The minimum amounts that had been there for key regions such as sub-Saharan Africa have been replaced by indicative financial pieces. There is a lot of power within this for delegated acts under Article 6.6 which alter where the money is going. Is Ireland going to be advocating for the Parliament and the Council to retain co-decision, so the Commission cannot effectively use this as a fund for whatever it decides is a priority? I view this particularly in light of Article 205 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, the Lisbon treaty. The Minister of State will be aware of it. This is not aspirational. This is our founding treaty. It states that poverty reduction must be the primary objective of overseas development aid. That does not seem to be the case here now. There is a very transactional approach.

Specifically in respect of migration, I am very concerned that there are elements which allow for the suspension of programmes where countries are seen as not complying with EU migration policies. That is very concerning, particularly in the context of the proposal for safe third countries, which is basically deporting people to countries they have nothing to do with. Ireland has not signed up to that component of the EU migration policy. It would be very worrying if that became a block to countries getting programmatic aid to address poverty.

I really hope development is going to be a named priority of the Presidency and I am trying my best to make sure it is in there. We start those discussions next Thursday when I will bring about 120 civic society academic actors into Iveagh House to discuss our development priorities in the Presidency of the Council of the European Union. I think we have already had a discussion on this in this committee; if not, we are going to have a further discussion. I am very keen to make that a public focus and to punch out into new audiences as well.

To answer the Senator's specific questions, within the negotiations we are adamant to make sure the European Council has oversight over the emerging challenges budget. I fundamentally agree with the Senator on that. We have pushed with other partners such as Luxembourg and Portugal to make those targets a little bit harder in respect of climate. One thing for us is to make sure there is a focus on least developed countries which goes to the Senator's reference to the initial part of the treaties in terms of ending poverty. That is key to Ireland's priorities when it comes to development, which feed into our priorities for European action. We are against the notion of delegated acts and have been working to make sure co-decision comes into it as part of the global Europe.

I also asked about the instrumentalisation question in relation to migration and the idea of programmatic suspension for non-compliance with EU migration policy. It seems very much to be a dangerous instrumental overreach.

Yes, and that was on my second page. Apologies. I overlooked it, but not by deliberate choice. That is coming under the Department of justice but we are partnering with them. We have concerns about that, to be quite frank.

We want to make sure that our programmes reach the furthest behind first without conditionality.

I have a few questions, some of which have been asked. The Minister of State did not spend much time on the context but he summarised it very well and it is worth re-emphasising. I was an adviser to the Minister for overseas development when we hit 0.47%, which was the highest we ever got to. It was in good times and at the height of the millennium development goal piece as well. There has been a change in the context. The UK is clearly a major loss in terms of overseas development. When Maroš Šefčovič was here, he told us Covid took a trillion out of the European budget or wallet in terms of its ability to spend, which is irretrievable. Russia and the security piece, which is often missed, is forcing this on countries. There seems to be an impression out there, in some areas, about military-industrial complexes as though there is a wilful desire to up games internationally among countries in defence procurement and defence preparation. We do not want to have any of these conversations. When I meet ambassadors, regardless of what country they are from, they will tell me there is no politician, and all of us here would agree, who would prefer to spend money on security and defence as opposed to schools, social protection and education. There is then the USAid being the biggest player, and the withdrawal of all those things. Will the Minister of State comment on that?

Some of the issues that have been covered by others, which were raised by some of the NGOs, were about poverty reduction as the primary objective. The Minister of State spoke about that and about development being central to our Presidency that is coming up. It is about ensuring the flexibility that is being built into what is being proposed does not serve to undermine long-term commitments, which was raised by Senator Stephenson. There is then the perceived movement away from grants, which NGOs regard as predictable and really solid, etc., to other forms of blended finance. The Minister of State spoke to it, but if he has something else remaining to say on it, we would be grateful to hear that as well.

The best we reached was 0.58% in terms of our target of 0.7%, but that was in the context of our economy being in a far more difficult place-----

When I left, it was 0.47%.

As of today, it is 0.4%, not including first-country reception of Ukrainian refugees. If that is included, it would go over 0.5%. Some countries include that; we deliberately do not. Our former colleague, the chair of the European Parliament development committee, Barry Andrews, has been very clear that Ireland is one of the few countries that deliberately separates it out. We are proud of what we are doing but we want to do more. We know we need to do more and, unlike other countries, we are still committed to pursue the achievement of 0.7%, even if it is more difficult to do so. Sadly, far too many countries have given up on even trying to achieve it because they are reducing their spending on development so much. Some countries are making the binary choice in that they are equating forfeiting their spending on development with the need to increase their spending on security and defence, including countries within the EU. I find that very difficult to take because I fundamentally believe investment in development is the first way of addressing the levels of global instability that often lead to the security concerns that EU member states talk about regularly.

The Cathaoirleach regularly speaks very eloquently about the impact of Russia's brutal war on Ukraine, not just on the people of Ukraine but here in this country and on our constituents, be they in Dublin South-West or Dublin Rathdown. This war is materially impacting every household in Ireland. It is putting our energy and grocery bills up and is forcing the Government to spend more on security then perhaps it would otherwise decide. It is not a binary choice for Ireland. We are increasing spending on housing and healthcare. We are very lucky to be in a position to do that. That is not the case for a lot of continental countries that do not have the economy we are lucky to have in this country.

Specifically on the global Europe regulation, we are very strong on the vast majority of Ireland's development funding being grant-based. We need to provide that flexibility and certainty to partners in the global south. We also support multi-annual funding, where possible, to make sure they can put in programmes that will be consistent and will serve the needs of the community as they appear. We are also very keen on not telling developing countries what to do. We want to work with them to make sure it is locally led.

I have a final question and anybody else may come in. This has exercised my mind for a while, since becoming Cathaoirleach, when I began to have conversations that I would not have been having. The Minister of State had those conversations previously as spokesperson on European affairs and as Minister of State. It relates to the occupied territories Bill in a different kind of way, if I can put it that way. It relates to our security, which seems like something completely different from the first point. At a meeting of the Institute of International and European Affairs, I remember raising the issue that for Irish people to fully understand and appreciate the impact six months ago of the invasion of Ukraine, would come down to things like European values being threatened as opposed to territory.

People justifiably say European values are not always equally spread across the European Union. When it comes to treatment of Palestinians, there is a complete difference of views as you travel across the European Union. People who have been lucky enough to travel or read can see that this is often not so black and white. I was in Moldova recently on an observation mission. From reading about the pogroms on Jews in the early parts of the 20th century there, and the awful European history, we need to invest some time and resources in a real understanding of the impact of these things on European cultures. A reasonable question people will ask is how a society that imposed dreadful things on a people can stand by and watch dreadful things being imposed on another people. I am not saying they are all equal in any shape or form, and it is a tricky conversation to have, but there is a piece missing, including the education and narrative, around that.

It is regularly said that Ireland is the most westerly outpost of the European Union. Sometimes, we live in blissful geographic isolation. We are physically a long way from Kyiv and Russia. We talk about security and defence. I sit around European Council tables with ministers from the Baltic states or from Poland, which are having to increase their defence budgets to 5% and, in many cases, have surpassed that already, out of sheer necessity. My Lithuanian counterpart has children a little bit older than mine, but not much different. He lives with a go-bag at all times. They have armed security guards at all times. They are living existences that I argue the vast majority of us would not be able to countenance, unless they are those of a certain age. Perhaps those who served at the latter end of the Troubles know what it was like for Ministers in Governments in the Republic at that stage. It is very important that we understand just how perilous the situation on the Continent is. European values are under attack. When we talk about those values, we talk about the things we take for granted, such as freedom of speech, compassion and democracy. We have seen the attempts to spread disinformation and misinformation, particularly in continental elections. We see what that means and we see that very clear approach being taken by state and non-state actors that do not agree with European values.

There is then the position of various member states. Deputy Ó Laoghaire alluded to this when he said that foreign policy remains a member state competence. Ireland has a certain approach to the situation in the Middle East. We are on one end of the European spectrum along with, particularly, Slovenia and Spain. One thing that was quite apparent is when Ireland, under Simon Harris as Taoiseach, put forward the suspension of the EU-Israel trade association agreement for a review of Article 2, 18 or 19 months ago, no one else supported us, but when the same proposal was put to the European Council in May, 19 of the 27 member states came through on it. That shows it is not necessarily a rigid set of values, but people respond to the actions. The very clear genocide being carried out in Gaza escalated and shifted the mindset. When I speak to ministers from countries that have a very particular and dark history, it is very difficult for them to speak in a way that perhaps we have a freedom to speak in this country because they are concerned about their own countries' past.

We do have to have that level of understanding. That does not necessarily mean that we agree with that position. It does not for an instance dilute our absolute abhorrence with what has happened in Gaza and east Jerusalem, in the West Bank, over the past two years or so but it does go to the point that we have to approach Europe remembering that we agree with each other on far more than we disagree on. Where we agree the most, we need to be not only seen to support but to genuinely politically support our shared endeavours. Global Europe gives us the absolute opportunity to do so.

Does Senator O'Loughlin want to contribute? I ask her to be very brief because we are over time.

I thank the Chair. I apologise; I was in another committee meeting. I thank the Minister of State for being here. We have had quite a number of engagements over the past while in relation to the importance of the work he is doing in representing Ireland, looking to see how we can support global Europe and how, through global Europe, we can support those in the developing world.

I have a few comments to make. With regard to the MFF, we should make sure that there is no reduction in the amount of money that would be given to deliver on the commitments that Europe has made. I also ask that explicit reference to poverty reduction be included. That would be to ensure alignment with Article 208. I also ask that specific spending targets be reinstated with regard to gender equality, climate, biodiversity, human development etc. We need to have specifics in relation to that.

It was interesting that on the plinth earlier, I was going out to meet some people and there was a group in from Cambodia meeting with the Minister of State, Deputy Moynihan. I happened to meet them informally. They were teachers from Cambodia. They were in the process of receiving funding, and maybe they have received it, to develop education in Cambodia through Irish Aid. They were heading down to Mary Immaculate College tomorrow. Those types of partnerships are really important. The Minister of State and I have spoken before about the Special Olympics experience with regard to supporting the Special Olympics on the ground, which Irish Aid did in Tanzania, Uganda and Malawi but this was really interesting because it was supporting both teacher education and education. We need more of those types of projects. They are in Ireland for two weeks and it might be worthwhile trying to set up a meeting with the Minister of State. I will try to get the details. They are my few comments for now.

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Seanadóir O'Loughlin. I reassure the Senator that Ireland is requesting that poverty reduction be included in global Europe. We are fighting as hard as possible to make sure that the EU's commitment to development is maintained despite the cuts by some member states. We understand the need to reinstate specific spending targets and we have asked for that to be firmed up.

I am fascinated about the group of teachers from Cambodia the Senator met. A couple of weeks ago-----

Just a few hours ago.

The Senator met them a couple of hours ago but just a few weeks ago, I met a group of trainee teachers from Uganda who were undertaking a similar programme with the director general. I know of the Senator's long-standing commitment to the Special Olympics. As she mentioned, we have managed to achieve quite a bit in that regard in a number of countries. What often goes under the radar is that there are currently 300 Ireland fellows. These are people from across the developing world who have come to study and receive a postgraduate education here in Irish universities and then they go back to work in the public service in those countries. They are from everywhere from Liberia and Sierra Leone to Kenya and Tanzania. I have met the alumni of the Ireland fellows programme, which has been going on for over 40 years. Thousands of people have gone through it and I would argue that it is a continuation. I struggle to travel to one of our African partner countries without meeting a Minister who was not educated by an Irish nun or treated by an Irish nun in a hospital. This is the modern-day version of it.

One other area I am very keen on is that in Deputy McCarthy's constituency, every year, we send over dozens of agricultural scientists to Teagasc in Fermoy, where they are trained and then they go back into the field. They can have success rates such as tripling milk yields to making sure crops are more durable in harsh climate existence. These are the really practical things that, perhaps, we do not talk about enough. When you have six agricultural scientists in Teagasc in Fermoy then going out to local farms to get that level of experience, it is more than just money or investment. It is creating a community, culture and relationships that stand the test of time.

Perfect. I thank the Minister of State.

I ask the Minister of State to keep an eye on that values thing. I think it is significant. In the most recent election we had, people expressed a particular view around it. We might not be able to scientifically test it but it is where the Union may be perceived to be vulnerable, when people say, "Look, these are our values and they do not seem to be shared". The point I was trying to make, maybe in a clumsy way, is that all of the countries have an integrity and a value system. We may need a little bit more dialogue between us at a public level so we can see what motivates and informs their actions, and how come they do not act the way we do or see things as dramatically as we do. It is not just about defining how they see the world but that, if the EU is to remain cohesive, it would be easy for people to say it is meant to be a Union of values but how can a Union of values sit by and observe some of the things that are going on. That is the key point I am trying to make.

I thank the Minister of State and his officials for their useful contributions at both meetings today and I thank my colleagues as well. We will adjourn until Thursday, when the committee will meet in private session at 12 noon. I look forward to seeing members then.