Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

Sure.

With regard to references to our past debates, I am bringing a new urgency. I have been talking about the occupied territories Bill for many years, but right now I believe this is urgent. It is urgent to ensure we do not have the kind of investment in question.

What the Minister of State said raises two further areas of concern. He mentioned that a future Government might have a different strategy. That is why we need to be really clear. It is simply not enough for a current Minister to be considering mechanisms and criteria – I would love to hear more about these and perhaps it would be useful to expand on them on Report Stage – or to be applying criteria on divestment from illegally occupied territories and undertakings operating in illegally occupied territories, because doing so is a matter of policy and a new Minister might have a different policy.When it comes to Ireland's compliance with international law, the spirit of that law, multilateralism and human rights, it should not be at the discretion of a future government as to whether the State is going to invest in illegally occupied territories. That is not a matter which should be at the discretion of a new Government; it is one we should be getting off the table right now at the outset. A future government will make its decisions, but, right now, it is this Oireachtas that will pass the Bill before the House.

As the Minister of State knows well, when a Minister comes before the Houses, he or she is asking for legislation to be passed. It is very reasonable that parliamentarians say that they are open to legislation being passed but that there is an important condition attached. We do not have to throw our hands up and say we will not crowd a future government or leave it to make its own decisions. It is our responsibility to ensure that we give as clear guidance as possible on a manner such as this. I do not accept the idea that we should not be overly specific in setting strategy. It is not a matter of opinion when it comes to international human rights, international law or ensuring that the State is not contributing to the continued making of money from illegally occupied territories. I am quite comfortable with no future government having strategic options in respect of that issue.

In the context of its clear guidance and discretion, as already stated, the NTMA has allowed investment in illegally occupied territories and in companies and undertakings operating in those territories. It has done that under this Government's watch, and it has done it over a number of years. This is quite a different Bill, and the mechanisms involved are also quite different mechanisms. The NTMA was clear that illegally occupied territories are not included in the exclusions relating to its current economic, social or governance measures.