Vincent P Martin (Green Party) | Oireachtas source

I thank the witnesses for their generosity of time and expertise. My family home is in Kildare and I have Canadian neighbours, so I am aware at first hand of how Canadians built up our county. Some time ago I had the privilege of leading a trade mission to Peterborough in Canada where there were street names such as Cavan Street, Donegal Street - which will be music to the ears of our Chair - and Monaghan Street. I had heard all about it but I was taken aback by the sheer deep mutual respect our countries have. Of course, Monaghan is twinned with Prince Edward Island. As all that is a given, what I will say next I say safely to our good friends, because that deep friendship is so unflinching that I have no deep worries about agreeing to disagree with Canada on this.

Ms Drisdelle spoke about predictability being very important in agreements, and I fully agree, but is it absolutely necessary to have that in the form of an arbitration option in the investor state courts, although that is an option? She also said that a platform is required for disputes and of course it is. She also said that enhanced mediation is really important and of course it is and the Irish courts do that. I have reservations. I am a fan and advocate of arbitration. Many years ago I became a fellow of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators. It has a vital role to play and I would like to see it play a much more enhanced role in our country. However, allowing a foreign corporation to sue a sovereign state in a situation where a case is heard outside the state's legal system is not something that I support. Of course it does not overturn our Government's decisions. If the witnesses are trying to give me succour by saying that, we would have lost our independence if that was true. However, I would be in dereliction of my duties if I was so blinded by the deep mutual respect and love we have for our countries not to point out the elephant in the room. I know this morning's discussion is not a legal examination but I am asking the witnesses whether, were they able to turn back the clock, it was absolutely necessary to usurp the role of the Irish courts. I believe the Canadian courts are just as good. They are tried and tested. They operate and exercise their judgments without fear or favour and have been tested before. Their integrity and competency is beyond question. It was a safe bet. Why give them up?

I know the economic benefits, which have been highlighted in compelling and stark terms. They are hugely attractive but I must speak as a public representative who values our country's sovereign and constitutional courts. The witnesses can say that it is an option but everyone knows that the selling point of arbitration, and one of its hallmarks, is that it is private and confidential. I do not want my country in a private and confidential dispute; I want transparency. Everyone knows that arbitration, even this kind of advanced, non-ad hoctype, is binding and cannot be reopened. One only litigates on it to enforce it or, in a rare exception, to try to annul it. It is hugely difficult to get into an arbitration hearing. We have safeguards in this country and in the celebrated democracy in Canada. Why this one-size-fits-all approach? Why stir things - I ask that with the upmost respect - when it could have been done in a way that all would have embraced, including me? Why go that extra yard to cause this sacrificial, unnecessary tension when we could have had just as good a deal with the same amazing celebration of our mutual economic benefits without it? I accept it is not quite a one-way street and that Ireland had done well. I say "thank you very much" to our brothers and sisters in Canada.

We love them but we do not like private, unaccountable, confidential dispute hearings involving our country when they are not absolutely necessary. I thank the witnesses. I hope that I balanced my comments with my unequivocal respect for the economic benefit but, most importantly, for Canada. It is up there. I have seen the love that our country has received, the way it is treated in Canada by leading that trade delegation. I have also seen that Canada is very independent and non-judgmental. I am sure that we will agree to disagree on this issue. We have different views but it does not, and should never, affect our overall super relationship.