Matt Carthy (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I sincerely thank our guests for attending and again commend Deputy Brady on bringing forward a meaningful action in response to what has been a decades-long policy on the part of successive Israeli Governments to flagrantly breach international law without consequence. That is why legislation such as this is so important. Words matter, of course, and the words of the Irish Government in response to the various actions of Israel have mattered. The Irish support in the 1980s for the two-state solution was important at the time and the decision of the Oireachtas to recognise the de facto annexation as such was important, but what is more important is that those strong words, whether they be uttered in the White House or anywhere else, be followed up with meaningful action.

Deputy Brady's Bill, and the occupied territories Bill and the motions to recognise the state of Palestine, are tangible, meaningful actions, which this State could and can make, that will have an impact internationally and will set out consequences for Israeli actions. Unfortunately, as has been said, we have been met with delay and obstruction on the part of the Government. The Government set out its rationale for the nine-month timed amendment in order to allow it time to address any concerns there might be within the legislation. It turns out after nine months that, apparently, none of those concerns have been addressed, given today representatives of the NTMA and the Department appeared before the committee and cited the exact same concerns but did not mention anything tangible they had done over the previous nine months to address them. Even the fact we require the presence of Mr. Meehan and Mr. Ó Éigeartaigh today as guests is evidence of an obstruction policy that is in place, because this committee waived pre-legislative scrutiny on the basis that any issues that may be there could be addressed on Committee Stage.

I welcome Deputy Durkan’s presence because for most of our guests’ contributions, not a single Government Member was here. The Government, which insisted on pre-legislative scrutiny, was not represented at the committee to hear expert witnesses advocate the need for this-----