Gary Gannon
Question:6. Deputy Gary Gannon asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs when the Control of Economic Activity (Occupied Territories) Bill 2018 will be examined on Committee Stage. [41910/23]
View answerThursday, 28 September 2023
Questions (6)
Oral answers (20 contributions)
My question pertains to the Control of Economic Activity (Occupied Territories) Bill 2018, but it is really in reference to any action at all. I am really asking about whether we can advance the occupied territories Bill. What can we actually do in terms of providing sanction?
As I have stated on several occasions in this House, the Control of Economic Activity (Occupied Territories) Bill 2018 would not be compatible with European Union law and would not be implementable. This is the clear legal advice on this matter. The Government will, therefore, not be taking it forward.
Ireland’s resolute opposition to illegal Israeli settlements is firmly grounded in international law. To adopt a unilateral approach that runs contrary to legal advice would undermine Ireland’s clear and principled stance on this issue as well as our broader promotion of compliance with international law at the United Nations and other international organisations.
The European Union reiterated its overriding policy of differentiation at the EU-Israel Association Council in October 2022. All agreements between the State of Israel and the European Union must unequivocally and explicitly indicate their inapplicability to the territory occupied by Israel in 1967. Ireland is vocal in ensuring this policy is applied consistently across all sectors of co-operation.
As regards trade, European Union law and guidelines on goods from settlements in the occupied Palestinian territory clearly differentiate between settlements on the one hand and Israel on the other. These guidelines were updated in May 2023, increasing the burden of proof on importers and economic operators involved in imports into the European Union of products originating in Israel. These guidelines are an important part of the European Union contribution to the implementation of UN Security Council Resolution 2334, and Ireland remains vigilant in ensuring their full and consistent implementation. Ireland applies a whole-of-government approach to this policy of differentiation, and my Department ensures there is information available for the public and companies regarding Ireland's policy on differentiation between Israel and the occupied territories on its website. Furthermore, the Government’s position on the illegality of Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territory informs our engagement with Israel across a range of bilateral issues, including my meetings with my political counterparts during my recent visit to Israel.
I am conscious, however, that when Deputy Brady brought forward the Illegal Israeli Settlements Divestment Bill 2023 around the withdrawal of investment through State investment funds in occupied territories in Israel, the Government did not advance it just a couple of months ago.
It was the Minister, Deputy Micheál Martin, who brought in the comparison between our response to the Russian invasion of Ukraine and said we have been consistent when it comes to the territorial expansion between condemning Russia's occupation of Ukraine and condemning territorial expansion in the West Bank forced upon the Palestinians by the Israelis. However, we have not when it comes to economic sanction. We have diverged completely. We offer rhetoric without anything behind it. That is where the frustration is for those of us who do not for a second disagree with any of the rhetoric. We have felt a very strong line but we have been completely weak when it comes to action. Therefore, when we talk about the Minister's belief in continuing the two-state solution, we would all, of course, love to see a two-state solution-----
I thank the Deputy.
-----but I believe the meekness of the EU, in particular-----
Time is up, please.
-----has led to that coming further and further away.
We have taken action in terms of the differentiation between Israel and illegal settlements in terms of the importation of goods. That is law, and we work to enforce that. On the divestment Bill, as the Deputy knows, there was a timed amendment in relation to that. The Minister for Finance, Deputy McGrath, is dealing with that because it seeks to amend the National Treasury Management Agency, NTMA, Acts, as the Deputy knows. It is a complex issue to resolve but we are going to do it. Therefore, we wanted to allow appropriate time to consider the implications of that Private Member's Bill to explore possible ways to proceed. We proposed a nine-month timed amendment. That gives us the time to consider the intent of the Bill, including consideration of alternative non-legislative based approaches or a combination of legislative and non-legislative based approaches, which would achieve the outcome we want in respect of that particular Bill. As I said earlier, this conflict-----
I thank the Minister; time is up.
-----is of a long duration, but we have been very clear in respect of action.
We will be coming back to the Minister.
I welcome the Minister's commitments to revisiting the Bill that was brought forward by Deputy Brady. Is that a commitment? Should we see some tangible action from that within the next three months, which I believe is when the timeframe is up? Should we see some tangible action on that by this time next year, for example, by the summer recess? When would the Minister foresee actual action coming from that Bill?
The Minister to conclude.
We gave it a nine-month timed amendment.
We have had them before.
I beg your pardon?
We have had nine-month time limits before.
We cannot have a back-and-forth.
The Deputy asked me a question so I will respond. It is nine months, so it is within that period. Certainly, we will have to come back to the Oireachtas with clear responses then at that stage.
That concludes that question.