Dáil Éireann Debate, Thursday - 7 April 2022
1. Deputy Louise O'Reilly asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the policy of his Department regarding trade agreements and trade missions to countries that have been found to be in gross violation of human rights. [18637/22]
View answerThe question is fairly straightforward. It is similar to a question I put to the Tánaiste on 30 July when I asked whether the State has a trade-at-any-cost position. I ask the Tánaiste for an update on the policy of the Department with regard to trade agreements and trade missions to countries that have been found in gross violation of human rights.
The promotion and protection of human rights is a foreign policy priority for the Government. We consistently raise our concerns on human rights through the most effective and appropriate channels, including bilaterally, particularly through our mission network.
The Deputy will be aware that international trade is a competence vested in the European Commission under the EU treaties, whereby the Union's negotiating strength is as a bloc of 27 member states representing some 450 million citizens. This ensures that actions, decisions and negotiations conducted by the Commission on behalf of the member states are more impactful than unilateral action by a single member state.
The EU's network of bilateral trade agreements also provides a platform for us to engage with our partners on sustainable development issues, including human rights, the environment, labour standards and trade and gender. Ireland supports the broader positive EU approach to ensure that there are strong and ambitious chapters on trade and sustainable development in free trade agreements, as part of the EU's value-based trade policy, which are consistent with international legal commitments and standards.
Ireland continues to support the EU in its efforts in implementing a more assertive approach to the implementation of trade and sustainable development chapters of free trade agreements, which reflects our commitment to values-based trade.
The approach was emphasised in last year's EU trade policy review that Ireland endorsed. The review recognised that progress on trade and sustainability issues, including human rights, will also depend on the actions of our global partners and that trade offers a valuable conduit by which to positively influence such actions.
As a small, open economy, I am sure everyone in the House will agree that Ireland benefits immensely from our export-orientated enterprises trading across the globe. Therefore, we fully support balanced international trade and the suite of EU free trade agreements that seek to underpin this. In tandem, the primary focus of all trade missions and associated meetings is to maximise opportunities to help Irish companies to access new markets and to increase the levels of foreign direct investment into Ireland.
I thank the Tánaiste. On 30 July the Tánaiste told me the Department pursues free trade and open market policies but these policies are subordinate to Ireland's responsibility to prevent the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, to promote regional stability and to promote and protect human rights. It is similar to the response the Tánaiste has given now. It outlines that we implement the trade elements of EU sanctions, formerly known as restrictive measures, and this is welcome. In the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine we see the value of sanctions and the value of increasing them. Advancing human rights should always be a cornerstone of our foreign policy and trade policy. How can the Tánaiste stand over trade missions such as the one he led with Enterprise Ireland to Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates last November? Time and again we have seen instances of mass executions in Saudi Arabia, such as those executions carried out in March when 81 men were executed on charges such as disrupting the social fabric and national cohesion and participating in and inciting sit-ins and protests. Amnesty International has stated these acts are protected by the rights to freedom of expression, peaceful assembly and association. How can the Tánaiste stand over this?
The way we structure free trade and our trade relations is on a number of tiers. We have the European Union, which is a free trade area of which we are part. It is a single market with unrestricted trade. There is a series of countries with which we have free trade agreements. Very often in these agreements there are chapters on human rights, trade and labour rights. There are the countries that fall under the WTO rules with most favoured nation status. Then there are countries against which there are sanctions. These sanctions are imposed at European level and include cases such as Russia, Venezuela and others. Of course we adhere to these sanctions. If there are sanctions, Ireland adheres to them. It is fair to say we will not be seeing trade missions to somewhere such as Russia any time soon. We have removed our Enterprise Ireland offices from there.
I do not agree with the death penalty. I voted in a referendum to prohibit it in our Constitution. I disagree with the fact that Saudi Arabia carried out those executions. It is not the only country that has the death penalty. I am pretty sure the US has probably executed more people than Saudi Arabia in recent years. I may be wrong about that but it does have a death penalty and uses it regularly. The Deputy's party leader and her party regularly go to the United States for engagements with people there, including politicians who support the death penalty. China does the same as does India. I do not support the death penalty but if we were to get to the point where we did not engage in trade or trade missions with countries that did, we would be knocking our biggest trading partners, including the US and China, off the list. I do not think that would be a good idea.
I do not know that I would draw the same equivalence between Saudi Arabia and the United States as the Tánaiste has done. That is fair enough; that is his opinion. I am referring to what Amnesty described as acts that are protected by the rights to freedom of expression, peaceful assembly and association, in other words gross violation of human rights. I refer specifically to the trade mission the Tánaiste himself led. I am concerned about the message it sends. I understand from media reports the Tánaiste said he raised concerns when he was there but not to the extent it was written down or recorded at any of the meetings. I find this to be somewhat disturbing but I am sure the Tánaiste can put on the record of the House when it was done. We saw gross violations of human rights and then immediately following the deputy head of government led a trade mission. That sends a very poor message. Previously I asked the Tánaiste whether the Department pursues a trade-at-any-cost type of policy. I would be grateful if the Tánaiste confirms it does not. I hope it does not but when we see trade missions to places such as Saudi Arabia, and we know its involvement in Yemen, and when we see the State still trades with Israel with regard to goods from the occupied territories we need to send out a very strong message and I do not think it is being done at present.
Of course we do not pursue a trade-at-any-cost policy. Part of my job and the job of the Minister for Finance is to sign off on sanctions. Regularly on my desk are statutory instruments that impose trade sanctions and investment sanctions on various countries. The Deputy would not always have been the most supportive of them, quite frankly, such as those we introduced against Russia in 2014 after its illegal invasion and occupation of Crimea. The Deputy would not be particularly supportive of the trade sanctions against Venezuela where democracy has been ended. I hope the Deputy can confirm that she does support the sanctions against Venezuela.
The Deputy misrepresented what I said on the death penalty. Obviously there is not an equivalence between the US and Saudi Arabia in this regard. We see plenty of human rights reports about the use of the death penalty in the United States, which is wrong. I would like to know whether the Deputy's party leader and party raise it on trips to the United States and whether she has documentary evidence of this. The truth is that most non-democratic governments in the world do not have very good human rights records. This applies to China, the Middle East, Palestine, many Arab countries and a lot of Africa. If it is Sinn Féin's policy that we should not do trade missions to those parts of the world it should say so because people whose jobs and businesses may be jeopardised need to know.
Let us get back on track here. Every side has gone over time. We are going back to the time limits, unfortunately.
