Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

It was very encouraging that ODI ranked Ireland number one for our development assistance programme in terms of getting money to the least well-off or the people furthest behind, to use the sustainable development goal, SDG, term. We can do more, but it is good to see that the programme is working.

I must correct the Deputy on multinationals. We are not opposing a legally binding treaty. Ireland is open to looking at options for progress on a legally binding treaty to regulate the activities of transnational corporations and other business enterprises, provided it covers all economic operators, be they multinationals or domestic companies. Any such instrument should reflect essential human rights principles. It should reaffirm the universality, indivisibility and interdependence of human rights and stress the primary responsibility of states under existing international human rights law to protect against human rights violations. Any new initiative should build on, rather than duplicate, existing measures, such as the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, OECD, guidelines for multinational enterprises and the International Labour Organization, ILO, tripartite declaration of principles concerning multinational enterprises and social policy. Ultimately, if it is to achieve its objectives, a legally binding instrument must enjoy broad support among UN member states. This will not work if only a handful of countries do it, nor will it work unless they put pressure on others to do the same. There must be a large coalition of countries to do this together if it is going to effective. Otherwise, certain business activity will move away from countries that are trying to do the right thing into other countries. We want to try to reward countries for doing the right thing and get a consensus-based approach. Ireland has no issue with trying to work towards a legally binding instrument that would be effective.

The European peace facility, EPF, is still a proposal at this stage. It was presented by the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Federica Mogherini, last year. It is receiving a technical examination at official level in Brussels, including in the context of the ongoing multi-annual financial framework, MFF, process. The EPF proposes to bring together existing financial instruments - the Athena mechanism for the funding of CSDP operations and the African peace facility supporting the African Union and peacekeeping. It proposes to increase the funding for these instruments. It also proposes to broaden the EU's capacity to provide military assistance to prevent conflict, preserve peace and strengthen international security in accordance with the objectives of the UN external action set out in Article 212 of the Treaty on European Union.

In simple terms, many parts of the world are nasty places where governance is not working and warlords dominate and make decisions. The EU has to intervene sometimes to try to support state actors who are trying to do the right thing. Somalia is a good example of that. It is a government that is trying to change Somalia to move away from violence, intimidation and terrorism. There is a peacekeeping force there. While reform is needed over time, it is essential to maintain peace and stability. The EU has a big part in funding that. Likewise in terms of Athena, it was essentially an anti-piracy initiative on the shores of Somalia where EU interventions and funding have made a positive impact on reducing and undermining the capacity for piracy. That has allowed shipping to take place in a much safer zone than was previously the case.

I understand what the Deputy is saying with regard to the focus of the EU needing to be on peace, stability, supporting peace, responsible development, partnership and so forth, but there are also times when we must help with the security infrastructure of a state.

If we get that wrong, it could contribute to the problem but there is a reason we have peacekeepers in different parts of the world. That is essentially the UN version of this. Irish peacekeepers, who are trained soldiers, on the Golan Heights and in southern Lebanon and Mali are making a positive contribution to peace but they carry arms. I also think the EU must have the capacity to be able to fund interventions, partnerships and programmes that are about the more difficult side of conflict prevention and sometimes conflict intervention to try to bring about stability and peace. I accept that this is a difficult area and there should be scrutiny of how and where we spend money to make sure we are contributing to peace and not conflict. Having been to many of these regions, as has the Deputy, I can see that sometimes intervention is the only course of action to protect vulnerable and exposed people from conflict and that costs money and requires co-ordination, training and co-operation. The EU is trying to create a more efficient and effective collective response to that. That is my understanding of the European peace facility.

I think we are doing a disservice to the Palestinians by giving up on a two-state solution. I do not believe a two-state solution is no longer viable. I think the two-state solution is still viable and the international community must insist on that as the outcome of any future peace negotiations. If we give up on that, we are essentially talking about some kind of one-state solution where Palestinians continue to be controlled in an occupied territory and I do not believe we will ever have peace and stability if this is the outcome. That is my view. The Deputy can have a different view. This is why we have been and continue to be so critical of expanding settlements. They are illegal. They are essentially pouring concrete on somebody else's land and we will continue to criticise that. The more concrete that is poured on Palestinian land, the more difficult it is to put together proposals for a viable two-state solution. This is why expanding settlements on somebody else's territory because one happens to be the occupier is not only illegal but makes a future peace agreement more difficult because of the complexity of that given the scale of many of the settlements on Palestinian territory in the West Bank and east Jerusalem. Ireland wants to be a friend to Israel and Palestine and Palestinians but the past two years have constituted a very negative period for that relationship and the hopes and aspirations of Palestinians in particular, which is something Ireland consistently speaks out on. I think I have answered the question.