Noel Treacy (Galway East, Fianna Fail)

I would make one final point in regard to the report. Given the Minister's preparedness to support the work of the European Parliament committee — as I said, only one other Minister attended — I find extraordinary the report's erroneous suggestion that the Minister, Deputy Dermot Ahern, failed to answer questions put to him. The transcript of the Minister's meeting with the European Parliament committee, which lasted almost two hours, is available on the European Parliament's website. It is plain that the Minister was entirely open in his exchanges with the committee. The suggestion that he was not is both discourteous and inaccurate, and absolutely unfair to him as a representative of a sovereign Government.

As I stated at the beginning of my address, it is a matter of some regret that the report produced by the European Parliament's committee expends so much effort on examining events in the past at the expense of suggesting concrete ways in which instances of extraordinary rendition can be prevented from occurring in the future. In the course of his meeting with the European Parliament, the Minister focused in particular on the potential benefits that might accrue from a review of the system of regulating international aviation. He suggested consideration be given to examining the Chicago Convention of 1944, in particular to considering the system of classification of flights for clearance and notification under the convention. Nowhere does this relatively straightforward but potentially beneficial suggestion appear in the European Parliament committee's report. This is a pity because it is clear that for any future action in this area to be effective, it will need to be taken at a European level. The Government has decided to seek to encourage discussion in the Council framework and our permanent representation in Brussels will in the coming weeks raise the matter with our EU partners.

Another aspect of this matter is the Government's dialogue with the Irish Human Rights Commission, IHRC, on the issue of Ireland's human rights obligations. The Government is satisfied it is fully in compliance with its obligations under international law and has made this clear to the IHRC in the course of an extensive and detailed correspondence on the international law issues between the Minister for Foreign Affairs and the IHRC. In the most recent letter from the Minister for Foreign Affairs to the president of the IHRC, dated 25 July 2006, the Minister suggested the possibility of continuing the dialogue at official level. The IHRC last week signalled its openness to this suggestion and our Department has suggested a range of possible dates for these meetings.

To conclude, the Government's consistent and long-standing position on the issue of extraordinary rendition is absolutely clear. We condemn it, we do not facilitate it, and, looking to the future, we are willing to examine practicable and specific ways in which, with our partners, we can lessen the possibility that future cases of extraordinary rendition might occur anywhere. That the European Parliament committee's report as it relates to Ireland is so unbalanced is of course a matter for regret. So also is its lack of practical suggestions for ways of preventing future occurrences of extraordinary rendition. However, the very fact of the European Parliament's conducting an investigation has helped to raise the profile of this issue, which in itself is positive.

Turning to tonight's debate, the Seanad is faced with a flawed motion based on a flawed report. I cannot commend it to this House. Rather, I urge Senators to lend their support to the practical, balanced and forward-looking counter-motion and, for a third time in almost a year, to act in accordance with their proud tradition of rational, evidence-based analysis of the issues before them. I know I can depend on the House to do that.