Marian Harkin (Sligo-Leitrim, Independent) | Oireachtas source

First of all, I extend my best wishes to Simon Coveney, who has announced that he will not run in the next general election. The reason I am doing so in this debate is that I knew Simon as an MEP and subsequently when he chaired the European Agriculture and Fisheries Council during the CAP negotiations in 2014. That was certainly a critical time for the future of the CAP and while I did not agree with Simon on the share-out of basic payments to farmers, nonetheless, his influence was so powerful that in Brussels the model became known as the Irish model. Subsequently, he was Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade during Brexit. Looking at the negotiations and the entire Brexit process from Brussels, it was very obvious to me that his competence, grasp of detail and, in my opinion, his statesmanlike approach played a significant role in advancing Ireland's interests during the entire process, so I wish him well.

Coming back to the Council conclusions from 27 June, I can only give a brief commentary on the Council statement. I will home in on two issues. They are comments on Ukraine and on Gaza. I was personally very disappointed at the completely unbalanced commentary from the Council on Ukraine and Gaza. It was seriously unbalanced and, therefore, unjust. It started off by saying that it will support Ukraine and that it strongly condemns the recent escalation of hostilities by Russia. That is fine. It then rightly expresses its deep concern about the fate of Ukrainian children unlawfully deported to Belarus and Russia. All of that is fine, but then we come to its statements on Gaza and the Middle East. It states it, "reiterates its strongest condemnation of the brutal terrorist attacks conducted by Hamas ... against Israel". That is fine. It continues to state that the Council "expresses its full solidarity and support to Israel". It states, "In exercising its right to defend itself, Israel must fully comply with its obligations under international law".

There is absolutely no balance here. It never says that Israel has flouted international humanitarian law. It does not condemn the bombing of any one of the 29 hospitals in Gaza. It does not condemn the fact that 84% of health facilities have been destroyed. Its language around Israel is neutral. It talks about the things that are happening but it never associates them with Israel. You would think that somebody else was involved in the conflict in Gaza. Article 19 states it "deplores all loss of civilian life". It talks about casualties, children, and so on, and the fact that there is insufficient entry of aid into Gaza, but there is no mention of who is responsible. It says we need more aid in Gaza but it does not call on Israel to allow the aid in. I could continue. There is too much of it there. It is really unbalanced and I am disappointed with it.

See this speech in context