Marian Harkin (Sligo-Leitrim, Independent)

I thank all the Deputies who contributed to the debate this evening with compassion and empathy. That is shared by Deputies on all sides of this House. All of us are appalled and horrified by what is happening in Gaza. I address the Dáil, fully aware of the deep sensitivity surrounding the plight of the Palestinian people. I strongly and utterly condemn the continuing Israeli military operations in Gaza. I use the word "genocide" because this has brought untold suffering on the people of Gaza. Israel's plans to expand its military operation in Gaza and establish its prolonged presence are beyond alarming and will further compound an already catastrophic situation.

The humanitarian crisis in Gaza remains to the forefront of our minds. I hold a deep respect for the principles at the heart of this Bill, our collective commitment to human rights and international law. This is the value I believe we all share in this House. The only issue that remains is how we can best act to make a real difference. As I said, we are all appalled by what is happening. My only question is how the Government can act in a way that is effective. I believe the Bill is well intentioned but we must carefully and with consideration assess the effectiveness of the Bill. What will it achieve? The Minister, Deputy Donohoe, has done this. The advice received by the Government indicates the Bill will not achieve what it intends to do. When it cannot achieve its objectives, that serves nobody in the end.

I reiterate that the objective of the Bill before us as outlined by Deputy Doherty, is to end the sale of Israeli bonds across the EU. Israeli bonds are not for sale on our Stock Exchange or through any trading company we in Ireland regulate. The Bill would not impose any restrictions on the ability of the Central Bank to approve a prospectus from Israel. That is the crux of the matter because it is crucial to remember that the prospectus regulation is EU law and Ireland cannot unilaterally amend or undermine that law. As Deputy Nash explained, approval of the prospectus only requires that it complies with EU law. There is no question of the Central Bank facilitating in any way the sale of bonds.

As Deputies are aware, Ireland is a committed proponent of multilateral action. We do not have a domestic sanctions regime. We implement EU and UN sanctions. When we address complex international issues, it is essential that any measures introduced be negotiated, agreed and introduced at EU or UN level. The collective power of the EU is best placed to promote the objectives of the bloc's Common Foreign and Security Policy and to bring about a change in the policy or behaviour of the subject of the measures. Any attempt to act unilaterally on matters as sensitive and complex as financial restrictions could undermine the coalition we are trying to see form at EU level. To me this is really important. Ireland has been painstakingly involved in helping to build this coalition. In this context, we need to prioritise co-ordinated action through the EU and UN.

The Bill does not focus on the actions of Israel as a state. Instead it seeks to criminalise those who sell and purchase the securities themselves, as well as entities that facilitate the sale and purchase of the bonds. This raises a number of issues. First, there is the question of extraterritoriality. The Bill, as drafted, aims to prohibit all sales and purchases of Israeli Government securities caught by regulations without reference as to how the transaction would need to be connected to Ireland for an offence to have occurred. While I have likened the measures proposed in the Bill to domestic sanctions, it is important to note some difference. Restrictive measures whether at EU or UN level are designed to be temporary and targeted in nature, and critically respect the fundamental rights of individuals and entities.

It is clear that this approach has not been taken in the Bill before us.

Section 3 of the proposed legislation requires the Minister to make a determination on how moneys raised by Israel from "a particular security or class of securities" are applied. From a regulatory point of view, the EU prospectus regulation does require a use of proceeds disclosure. However, it would be possible for an issuer to arrange an issuance of securities with a use of proceeds that excludes these purposes by, for example, issuing a green bond. Therefore, in terms of trying to restrict Israel's ability to raise funding to support an action in the occupied territories Bill, this Bill completely overlooks the fungibility of such financing. That leaves loopholes in this Bill.

See this speech in context