Brendan Ryan (Labour)

I apologise if I gabble because I want to refer to a number of things. I thought there was a united view in the House on this issue, with one or two exceptions. A couple of speeches were entirely wrong about our motives, our omissions and about certain realities. I will not dignify some of the more abusive comments by even making reference to them because there are many in this House who wish to be serious about this issue and keep an even-handed view on what is an extremely difficult and human crisis.

I have only one reason for identifying in this motion a disproportionate suffering on the part of the Palestinian people and that is because it is an undisputable fact. No Israeli children will die tonight for the want of clean water or because their drinking water is polluted by sewage or because there is no electricity. Nobody has the political or military capacity to do that to Israel. There are many thousands of Israeli children. One Israeli soldier has been incorrectly kidnapped captured and detained in Gaza somewhere. Please God he is still alive. There are at least 1,000 Palestinians detained without trial by Israel. That is what I mean by disproportionate and it is the only argument I have with the speech by the Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs, Deputy Treacy.

The Minister of State's speech was finely crafted a speech as one can get from the Department of Foreign Affairs. The Department can craft them very well and I mean that in the best, most positive sense. I have a very high opinion of the Department and its staff, even though I have had disagreements with it. The fundamental flaw in our policy is not the even-handed nature of our rhetoric, condemnation or support but the absolutely uneven-handed nature of our actions.

One of the conditions that has been imposed on Hamas is that it must give up violence, unconditionally, and if it does not, we will not talk to it. We have never said to Israel that it must give up violence, unconditionally, or we will not talk to it. We have wrung our hands, wept, rhetorically at least, and said we wished it would. We have told Hamas that it must recognise Israel's right to existence. We have spent years but still have not got unequivocal, unambiguous acceptance by Israeli Governments of the right to existence of a Palestinian state. We have told Hamas that it must commit itself to agreements already made but the Israeli Government is not committed to agreements already made and has made that perfectly clear. The former Prime Minister, Mr. Ariel Sharon made that clear, as did his rival for the leadership of Likud, Mr. BenjaminNetanyahu. The last Israeli Prime Minister who unequivocally supported the right to existence of a Palestinian state was Mr. Ehud Barak, who lost power a long time ago and been replaced in government.

Israel does not meet the conditions that are being imposed on Hamas. As if that is not bad enough, we will take no action in that regard. That is the fundamental flaw in the EU position, namely, that it took immediate and drastic action because a government was elected in the Palestinian territories that it did not like. It insisted that government must do certain things but did not make the same demands of Israel. That is why I cannot accept the Government amendment. The amendment supports not a form of criticism, a form of words or a form of political statement but a form of international action which is scandalously one-sided.