I do not wish to repeat what I said at the previous meeting. It is not necessary as most of the same people are here and I am sensitive to that. However, the letter we received from the ambassador was entirely unsatisfactory. We decided, in replying to and making a refutation of that letter, to obtain Mr. Nawi's account. I am satisfied with that approach but we should send a further letter to the ambassador in respect of the boarding of the Spirit of Humanity and holding people who are peace activists. We should also reply to some of the language that has been used in the statements issued.
We are dealing with a country with a record of sinking a boat or interfering with one located 24 nautical miles offshore or which is implementing a naval blockade. Unlike the position in this country, there are not always two sides to every story in the jurisdiction to which I refer. In this case there are not two sides to the story — there has been a breach of international law and people are being deprived of necessary medicines. The committee must reflect this in its correspondence. A view is sometimes taken that one can always reach a moral conclusion in respect of a matter of this nature by endlessly stating that one must hear both sides. If one wanted to be particularly convoluted about it, one could invent a third side.
I am perfectly happy to wait until our next meeting to hear how the committee has dealt with the first correspondence in respect of Mr. Nawi's position, the boarding of the Spirit of Humanity and the imposition of a naval blockade, the status thereof in international law, and so on. I have tried to initiate courteous communications with Dr. Evrony but he has recently taken to writing to the leader of my party, who would also be delighted to meet him to discuss certain issues.
The committee should take a strong position on this issue. There are some of us who have been involved with these matters for a long period. While some progress has been made, there has been none in respect of illegal settlements — which remain in place — the demolition of houses and compliance with human rights law in the form of the EuroMed agreement. In addition, very little progress has been made with regard to people's right to return, and so on, and, therefore, we are merely drifting. In the committee's correspondence I would like to see evidence of an attempt to arrest that drift. The action we have taken most recently is probably better than that which we took in the past.