Charles Flanagan (Laois-Offaly, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I outlined them in detail and if the Senator listened to my remarks he would have heard them. EU members at the council try to vote together where possible. If Senators check the record going back over a series of meetings they will see that we try to vote together where possible in order to maximise our influence. Having 28 voices instead of one is far from an abdication of responsibility and far from an abdication of our independence. It is engaging in a process to find a resolution to give us a strong voice. Every Senator who spoke this afternoon and even those who did not will agree that what is needed more than anything else is a strong voice.

In this case the European Union had not decided on a common abstention. The indications were late in the afternoon that no other EU partner was considering a "Yes" vote, while perhaps four of the nine EU member states might have voted "No" instead. This was the point made by Senator Paschal Mooney from the other side of the House.

He is quite correct and his analysis is quite proper because this would have resulted in a worse voting outcome for the resolution, which would have had the consequential effect of undermining the overall EU influence within the Council. The resolution having been passed by those present, as we knew it would be, Ireland will now fully support the commission of inquiry in fulfilling its mandate. Senator Darragh O'Brien, or perhaps one of his colleagues, asked whether we would now go back with a new resolution in order to change the wording, and the answer to that is "No". That issue is dealt with and let us see how the process proceeds from here.

I want to deal briefly with the proposal to expel the Israeli ambassador, as evidenced by the contributions of Senators James Heffernan, David Norris and others. I note the contribution of the Independent Senator Sean D. Barrett in that regard. As we all know, there are very frequent calls to expel the Israeli ambassador, although we have never a proposal about any other representative within the diplomatic corps. Our foreign policy has always been based, above all, on the resolution of any conflict by dialogue. We do not, therefore, respond to crises by expelling the interlocutor except in most exceptional circumstances. Ambassadors exist, as we know, to allow clear channels of communication between governments and are more necessary in bad times than in good. We have continually conveyed our views to the Israeli Government through its ambassador or, as was mentioned in reference to my earlier contribution, Ambassador McKee in Tel Aviv. I do not intend to deprive us of this vital channel, particularly in a time of crisis.

The corollary, of course, would be the recall or the expulsion of our ambassador in Israel and the crippling of our own embassy in Tel Aviv. As well as communicating our views to the Israeli Government and reporting to me on the Israeli views of, and the politics around, the crisis, Ambassador McKee has a fundamentally important role to play at this time. He has been personally engaged in the evacuation of Irish citizens and their families from Gaza, which I am sure everyone will agree is a fundamental aspect of his role in times of crisis. I refer back to the points made very well by my colleague, Senator Paschal Mooney.

If we expelled every ambassador from Dublin for alleged human rights abuses, there would be very few CD-plated car registrations around our city. I am not sure if we want to take it upon ourselves to be the moral and ethical guardians of the world. While we spent most of this afternoon discussing Gaza, rightly so, we need to be mindful, as some Senators were, of atrocities in Syria, North Korea, Iraq and in numerous other difficult regions throughout the world.