Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I second that it would be useful to have a debate on forestry, which would also look at reforming forestry policies, including the mandates of such organisations as Coillte. We have seen that monoculture does not work and is dangerous. We do not simply want a short-term solution where we replant more of the same. We need to move, within Coillte and our wider subsidised forestry policy, towards the idea of something that is environmentally, socially and economically sustainable, rather than have short-term, commercial monoculture which does not deliver for the climate or in the face of climate change.

I will expand on something I mentioned yesterday about how important international and national law are. Right now we are seeing extraordinary attacks on the concepts of international law, the rule of international law and the idea that there are common principles and standards we will apply to one another. In other countries we are also seeing attacks on the legal and political checks and balances and that means an attack on people's rights. I therefore urge that we try to address this. One way we in Ireland can show that we take international law seriously is by legislating for it and delivering the occupied territories Bill. That is one of the clearest signals we can send to the world that we take international law and the International Court of Justice seriously.

We need to see - and I urge for a debate on this - regulations, laws and rules. Regulations and standards do not slow down innovation. In fact, they drive innovation that is compatible with democracy. Right now, there are proposals in the EU for an omnibus Bill that is being called "the bonfire of regulation", to destroy a huge number of the standards we demand of corporations. Ireland has a key voice, especially in applying regulations and defending the principle of regulation because we are the key anchor for many of the large international tech corporations.

Many Senators spoke eloquently about neutrality yesterday and I hope we will discuss it further because we need to defend our neutrality. It is precious and an asset to Europe and the world. Let us be clear, the United States of America has a huge army. Germany is the most heavily armed country in Europe. Neither of those countries is being defended or protected against assaults on laws, checks and balances. Armies do not protect against that. Having legal standards we all stand by gives us the greatest protection as a smaller country. Having two or three more tanks or ship - although we do need to resource our Naval Service, including those who work in it, a little more - does not protect us. What protects us and how we contribute to European protection is by taking our role as regulator in such areas as data and online regulation very seriously. Crucial to that is standing by regulations and standards at European level and championing their retention, because if we get rid of them it will be a slippery slope.

I will finish with a Sumerian proverb I found on the Internet - I hope it is an accurate one: do not bow your head for that which cuts heads. It is crucial at this time that we do not bow our heads because of a short-term fear of corporate response or unhappiness and cede our power to ensure corporations are regulated by the State and democracy and the people remain paramount in the five years ahead, which will be a crucial and perhaps challenging five years.

Perhaps we could have debates on those two topics.