Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire (Cork South-Central, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

From both the Minister of State and the Minister, Deputy Harris, we have heard lots of fine words from the Government benches. There is a lot of talk about the things that have been done. I will not gainsay that some of what the Government has done has been important. Some of that came about because of Opposition pressure and public pressure, but no doubt there was motivation from people in government to do the right thing as well.

However, much of what we have heard tonight is dancing around the issue. This motion relates to the occupied territories Bill and it has not fundamentally addressed what is happening here. The Government cannot expect us or the Irish public to believe that black is white. The Minister of State cannot say the Government is as committed as ever when Ministers, including the Taoiseach and Tánaiste, have clearly said there would have to be a new Bill. It is very clear from the Government amendment that it is walking away from the proposition to ban trade in services. The Minister of State has not addressed that.

I have heard the Minister of State and the Tánaiste speak about technical issues and legal issues, and trying to create some kind of distinction. I have no problem - nor does Senator Frances Black or anyone else - in navigating issues. Of course it has to be legally sound. That is not the objection. The Minister of State has not addressed the objection here. A euro, a dollar, a pound or whatever that is gained in trade in services is the exact same as a euro, a dollar or a pound gained in goods. As most Irish trade comes through services, why are we making this distinction?

The Minister of State put considerable emphasis on Ireland's role in pushing the International Court of Justice and the need for a definitive decision on that. The International Court of Justice said there is no distinction to be made. The Minister of State may dispute this, but it is very hard to conclude anything other than the Government is changing course. It had opportunities to clarify this. Before the election we had the Tánaiste and Taoiseach, in reverse positions at the time, stating that they were committed to the occupied territories Bill. No distinction was made at that time.

Since then, not only are we now talking about a new Bill, but all the wording including the amendment here today talks about a watered-down Bill which is essentially flying on one wing. In talking about the substance of this, the Minister of State and the Tánaiste were very keen to emphasise that we must do this, we must do that, and it must be right and effective. It must be right, it must be effective and it must carry the substance of the International Court of Justice decision. For it to be effective it should not exclude half of the purpose or perhaps more than that depending on what trade comes out of the occupied territories.

I believe this will not be voted on for a week and a half. I urge the Minister of State and the Government to reconsider their position. If the Government is committed to the purpose, even if as the Minister of State says technical changes need to be made, I am sure that engagement can be sought on that. That is the purpose of Committee Stage and Report Stage. The Government should reconsider its position and allow a substantive debate on it instead of bringing in a weakened Bill that is not even committed to the same objectives and ultimately I think will fail to meet the needs that are there. While this is not the only element of the policy, this matters because for international law to be applied, sanctions need to be applied. We cannot ignore half the picture when it comes to sanctions which is what the Government is proposing to do.

See this speech in context