We now come to the motion which Senator Norris proposed earlier. I have been working on this as we were talking and we can look at it now.
Business of Joint Committee.
I will second the motion.
The Senator asked only for it to be discussed. This is what I propose:
The Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs, recalling its resolution of 16 April - which is very comprehensive and dealt with many of these issues at the time - concerned about the humanitarian situation in Iraq, calls on the occupying powers in Iraq to increase their efforts to provide adequate water and power for the population; to provide proper medical facilities at least in line with the requirements of the fourth Geneva Convention so that optimum medical care can be given to the citizens of Iraq who have been injured in the recent war; to work with the United Nations and the international Red Cross to ensure that all possible humanitarian assistance is given to those in need in the population, to provide proper security for hospitals and other vital public infrastructures and for the staff who work in these places; and to ensure that an efficient interim leadership and administration is put in place to secure the well-being of the people of Iraq.
I thought of adding some of the figures in this presentation, bearing in mind the way they have increased.
Could you read out the opening part of it?
"The Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs - recalling the other motion - concerned about the humanitarian situation in Iraq, calls on the occupying powers in Iraq to increase their efforts", etc.
That part "to increase their efforts" assumes their efforts have been adequate. I would not agree with that part.
"To meet their responsibilities" might be better.
May I also suggest inserting "to try to ensure"?
The Geneva Convention is the central——
We go on to say "at least in line with". We mention the Geneva Convention after that.
I am very grateful to the Chairman for his motion which is extremely good. We could take both of them. I have a slight change to mine, if I might draw it to the attention of the Chairman and the committee because, with the best will in the world and all his talent, not even Deputy Brian Cowen could personally ensure that the United Kingdom government will live up to its obligations. He has not had any success, and neither has anybody else, in the past in doing that.
I had noticed that.
I will also say that in the Seanad so if I could change it in the following way: "that this committee calls on the Minister for Foreign Affairs to use his good offices to try to ensure", I would like to stick with that because it has been seconded. I take it that DeputyHiggins would have no difficulty in seconding it with the slight amendments that have been made.
The amendments are acceptable to me.
I wanted to get that in because it is very specifically targeted and focused and I wanted to use it in a debate in the Seanad. I would suggest, with great respect, that the Chairman has done us all a favour by introducing these other elements in his own motion and that there would be no difficulty in passing both of them but I would like to——
The "to ensure" we have noted, "that the United States and the United Kingdom meet their absolute obligations. . . ".
Yes.
That is all right.
It is an absolute moral obligation, and a legal obligation under the fourth Geneva protocol and you will recall that I read it to the former foreign minister and chairman of the Irish Red Cross, and member of Fianna Fáil, and he was enthusiastic in support of it.
I suggest that we lead from that, that we say that "the United States and the United Kingdom governments meet their absolute obligation". I do not suggest that they are immoral. In other words, they have an absolute obligation and we want to insist that they meet their absolute obligation.
Yes, it is a moral obligation and a legal obligation.
Yes. Well are we happy with that?
Yes. What I am suggesting is that this has been very helpful and that I would be happy to take my motion and would enthusiastically support the Chairman's as well but it has a slightly different focus.
It has. Mine includes yours.
We could leave them separate. I have tabled mine in the Seanad and I want to discuss it there. It is helpful to me to table it here also, and it does not in any way conflict with yours and yours is also very helpful. We have two very useful motions.
Our motion incorporates yours because it worked with yours. We support the essence of your motion anyway.
So I take it my motion is accepted by the committee.
I think so, yes.
Yes, thank you, and your own motion as well?
Yes.
Thank you very much. That has been very constructive and I am most grateful to you.