Nessa Cosgrove (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome the Minister of State. Many Senators have raised this issue as members of the foreign affairs committee. I ask for a straight answer about the timeline for the occupied territories Bill and the advice of the Attorney General. My Labour Party colleague and my party's spokesperson on foreign affairs, Deputy Duncan Smith, has asked the Tánaiste if we would get an answer in October and was told it will probably be in November. From talking to Senator Black, I understand a meeting had been scheduled for last week but because of the motion of confidence it was moved from that date and she has not been given a specific date. Many Members of this House have raised it. The Taoiseach was here last Thursday. We just want to know. It was agreed in the foreign affairs committee to include services in the Bill. Can we please get an answer on what aspects of services are believed not to be implementable? The foreign affairs committee has met international lawyers who were able to outline a clear pathway for the inclusion of services. There was a strong argument that we should not be worried about the inclusion of services, that they should be part of the Bill and that if it does not work out, it can be changed to exclude services. In my understanding, that is easily done. I acknowledge we are waiting for the advice of the Attorney General but by not including services, are we not uncompliant with the International Court of Justice? As the Minister of State knows, we have all stood on the side of justice and the majority of people in Ireland want to see this Bill passed as soon as possible, but they want the inclusion of services.

What is the point of witnesses coming before our foreign affairs committee, which deliberated for a significant amount of time, or any Oireachtas committee if its recommendations are not adhered to? Spain has banned the importation of goods and the advertisement of services. As a country, we want to go further than this. In fairness, credit where credit is due, we have been leading out on Palestine and as a country. Huge credit has to be given to Senator Black for drafting the Bill in the first place. It is going on too long. It was very much an election promise that this Bill would be enacted. How can Israel get away with genocide in front of our eyes when the International Court of Justice has made a ruling on it? How is this going to stand for humanity? I am not going to give a big lecture about it because we all know where we stand. We need a clear answer. When will we get the advice from the Attorney General? What is preventing services being included? I know the constant argument is that it will affect the trade of Irish companies because of the boycotting and divestment rule in America but we should not be trading with illegal settlements anyway.We just need to get a clear answer on it, and I thank the Minister of State for coming here to address this.

Niall Collins (Limerick County, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

First, the Government's position and, indeed, that of the European Union is clear. Settlements are illegal under international law and undermine the realisation of the two-state solution. This is the long-standing position of Ireland, the European Union and many other international partners.

In June 2025, the Government approved the general scheme of the Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territory (prohibition of importation of goods) Bill. The main purpose of the Bill, as set out in the general scheme, is to prohibit the importation of goods into the State from Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem. This is in line with the programme for Government which commits to prohibiting the importation of such goods. It is also priority legislation for this term, published by the Government through the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade.

On the specific issue of services, the Tánaiste has said that he has no policy issue in relation to the inclusion of services. Trade in services is considerably more complex, which I think the Senator will appreciate, than is the case with goods, and there remains considerable legal uncertainty as to whether their inclusion is permissible under EU law. Legal clarity is needed on whether it is possible to include services, and the Tánaiste has asked the Attorney General to advise on this, as the Senator will be aware. We also have to take account of practical issues with regard to implementation should services be included in the scope of the Bill.

On the timeline, over the summer the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs and Trade, to which the Senator referred, held a number of hearings on the general scheme, and received submissions representing a range of views and perspectives. The joint committee then published its report on the Bill. Work to analyse the report and its recommendations is well under way. A regulatory impact assessment is also currently being finalised by the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade and will be available on the Department’s website quite shortly when completed.

The next steps in the process, including the timeline for the progress of the Bill, will be considered by Government shortly. The Tánaiste expects to engage further with Government colleagues and the Attorney General on these issues in the coming weeks. In addition, we continue to engage at European Union and international levels with like-minded partners on this issue. In the absence of action at the EU level, Ireland has welcomed the announcements by the Dutch, Spanish, Slovenian and Belgian Governments regarding their own intention to ban the importation of goods produced in illegal Israeli settlements. It remains the Government’s preference that collective action would be taken at EU level and Ireland continues to pursue this. In light of recent developments, the EU’s immediate focus is on ensuring the success of the ceasefire and peace deal. It is essential that peace is given a chance to succeed.

At the Foreign Affairs Council in Luxembourg on Monday, the Tánaiste met his EU counterparts and welcomed the ceasefire and release of hostages as well as calling for the EU to support efforts to flood Gaza with urgently needed humanitarian aid. Preserving the very fragile ceasefire and ensuring humanitarian access at scale is a priority. The Tánaiste also recalled the unacceptable nature of what has been happening in the West Bank and stressed the importance of ensuring that the concept of a two-state solution resulting in a viable, contiguous Palestinian state in the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem remains front and centre in the EU's approach and that all future phases of the current agreement are conducive to its implementation.

Nessa Cosgrove (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We do not really have a response yet and do not have a timeline. The danger is that, because of the presidential election and then we are going to be coming up to Christmas, this issue will be kicked down the road again. The Minister of State mentioned the fragile ceasefire. It is very fragile, but surely the ceasefire would be kept in place if Israel knew that there would be some sanctions or that it could not get away with this. Since 7 October 2023, the Israeli aggression on Palestine has resulted in 69,215 people being killed, 179,237 people being injured, 18,700 Palestinians being detained, and 1.9 million people being displaced. Israel is still getting away with it, and I am disappointed that there is not a clear timeline and that we cannot get a straight answer.

Niall Collins (Limerick County, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I do not agree with the Senator that the issue is being kicked down the road. It is a very significant priority for Government. It is a priority for me, as a member of Government, and for my party. I have been to the West Bank and settlements. I have seen the proliferation of Israeli settlements across the West Bank and in East Jerusalem. It is beyond comprehension. I have been a supporter of the occupied territories Bill since it was first introduced into these Houses by Senator Frances Black. I co-sponsored it in Dáil Éireann when we were in opposition. We have come from a position where it was deemed that we could not progress that legislation to where it is now: the Bill being a Government priority. It is in the programme for Government. When the Bill is passed, regardless of whether services are in it, and I am not going to die in the ditch in relation to the services piece - I think too much of a big deal is being made of that element - it will be a powerful international statement by Ireland, have no doubt about that.

To be fair, when you produce legislation, it has to be robust and has to be able to stand up to scrutiny. There is no point in producing cackhanded legislation that will not stand up to a challenge or scrutiny. Have no doubt about it, it will be challenged. It is absolutely going to be challenged, so the Attorney General is right. I appreciate the Senator's concern, and everybody's shared concern, in wanting to see this legislation progress.

It is not the case that Government is dragging its heels when it comes to this legislation. The opposite is the case. It is a priority for all of us. We want to do it, we want to do it right and we do not want it to rebound and fail at the very first test. It is reasonable that the Attorney General and the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade should be allowed to bottom out the piece about the services element. Certainly, banning the importation of goods in the first instance will be a huge first step. If we do not get services in the first draft of the Bill then, like any legislation, it can be revisited. Whether it will be included in the first instance, I cannot say at this time. I would like to see it in there, but if it is in there, it must be airtight and hold water.