Irish Independent, 19th October 2009

The welcome release of Sharon Commins and Hilda Kawuki after their 107-day ordeal in Darfur should act as a spur to the international community to focus not only on the protection of the vulnerable in the Third World, but also on the security of those who help them.

The experience of Sharon and Hilda shows the dangers that aid workers find themselves in as they selflessly put themselves at the service of some of the poorest people on the planet.

Darfur, where the two girls worked, has seen a wave of kidnappings in the past year, and aid workers working in the hostile region have had to step up security, which makes their jobs a lot more difficult than they already are.

And it is not just aid workers who constantly find themselves in danger. While we are absolutely thrilled and relieved that we can welcome Sharon and Hilda back to the bosom of their families, we must also remember Fr Michael Sinnott, who is still in captivity in the Philippines, and desperately in need of medication.

In a perfect world, workers such as Sharon and Hilda and missionaries like Fr Sinnott should not have to put themselves at risk as they go about their vital humanitarian work. So I enthusiastically welcome indications from Foreign Affairs Minister Micheal Martin last night that he is looking at offering extra protection for aid workers in the field.

We are living in difficult times and here in Ireland we are having to make hard decisions, cutting back and prioritising.

But for much of the Third World there is little room for choice and the struggle to survive is the sole priority. In the Third World, there is nothing to spare, so when there is a cut it can be fatal as the knife going straight to the bone.

Thanks to the generosity of the Irish people our Government has its own aid budget. The use of this money must come under tighter scrutiny now more than ever. If further cuts are to be made it is vitally important that the proportion which goes to aid agencies and missionaries is not interfered with.

This is the money that is used for the basics of saving lives; no other government ledger carries a life and death priority in its balance sheet.

The money in these margins is unique. The difference between living and dying should be a potent argument for ringfencing it, but recession is no respecter of such niceties. That is why the news from Britain that Prime Minister Gordon Brown has promised to make the UK's commitment to international development legally binding is so welcome.

Mr Brown has pledged that his Labour Party will enshrine in law its commitment to spend 0.7pc of national income on overseas aid.

In a keynote conference speech, he said: "Others may break their promises to the poorest of the world, but Labour Britain never will.

"We will pass legislation that the British government is obliged to raise spending on aid to the poorest countries to 0.7pc of national income."

This is a step that will undoubtedly save lives in the Third World and I would appeal to the Irish Government to do likewise.

One has to revert to the 1980s to find an economic parallel with today's financial challenge; but it should be noted, that even back then as a nation, per capita this country was contributing more than any other country in the world to aid.

Every minute around the world 100 people are being forced into extreme poverty by an economic crisis they did nothing to cause. The aid money given to implementing agencies and missionaries is used to ease their suffering and save lives. Yet so far €255m has been cut from the Irish aid budget with real consequences for the poor. Again it must be stressed that this humanitarian intervention is not dispensable. Aid spent by implementing NGOs cannot be bracketed in the same terms as money set aside for conferences, setting up of quangos, sending of armies of consultants to the field and such like.

It funds the emergency service of putting food in the mouths of the starving.
Without it, people die. That is why it is in a different league to other government funding, and that is why, on behalf of the voiceless people of the Third World, I would implore our Government to take a leaf out of Mr Brown's book, and secure the aid budget from future cuts.

One is mindful of the fact that the Government is grappling with grave difficulties: even so, they are nothing as compared with the struggles of millions of mothers in sub-Saharan Africa battling to keep their children alive.

Put plainly, 26,000 children lose this struggle for survival every single day in the Third World.
Like all other NGOs, aid cuts have sorely impacted on GOAL. We have had to pull our GOALies out of the Congo, and hundreds of thousands of the poor now must go without essential assistance. Virtually all of our programmes have been hit hard. But the Congo, Niger and Kenya have borne the brunt of the hardship.

Can one imagine what the outcry would be if it were decided that the ambulance or fire brigade services were to have their budgets slashed? The aid community is an emergency service -- when funding is cut off people starve. There is simply no one else to answer the call of need.
When governments experience budget deficits we cannot expect people who have nothing to do with the problem to subsidise the shortfall. Why should they pay the ultimate price for overspending?

Obviously in a recession, with so many competing demands, it is all too easy for world governments to raid their aid budgets and shore up domestic finances. But this temptation has to be resisted and if it takes new legislation to guarantee no interference, so be it.

Ireland has an unrivalled global reputation of caring for the poor overseas, built by the heroism of missionaries and aid workers like Sharon and Hilda. What was so hard won must not be sacrificed because of short-term cuts that could have tragic long-term consequences.

© 2009 The Irish Independent