Mr. Rupert Schlegelmilch:

From our point of view, it is absolutely necessary to change the existing system. In this European project, we have a number of member states who see CETA as the best way to reform the old system. The likes of Ireland do not have the old treaties out there which have caused some of the uncertainties we are discussing. When we started these negotiations, there was unanimity at the Council to make the negotiation part and try to use that. That has effects for Ireland, which is bound by the Energy Charter Treaty. That treaty has some of the same issues we are trying to rectify in the ICS. There will be a positive effect if we continue to show the world reform is possible and we will also do that elsewhere. In the fully functioning legal and judicial system, it is not certain we will ever use ICS in the bilateral relation.

There is also the consideration that we have to be consistent. The Senator mentioned Myanmar and other countries. It is difficult to explain to the world that we want others to sign up for protection for our investors in their circumstances and then say we do not need it elsewhere in the world. There is a question of consistency where we need to be true to our own principles that we believe this is perfectly okay and, in our context, not doing anything that is available under Irish or European law in any case. We have a treaty which, in Ireland's specific situation, bilaterally creates something which was not there before but the advantages for the overall development of this policy, including areas where Ireland is already part of the process, are worth the effort.