Táimid ag bogadh ar aghaidh go dtí an tríú ceist, in ainm Independents4Change. Tá trí bhomaite ag Deputy Catherine Connolly.

I understand a trade agreement in our name is to be signed by the European Commission on 28 October, having been given the thumbs up by the Government. Unbelievably, it is an agreement that has not been discussed or put to a vote in this Chamber. In reality, it has not seen the light of day in Dáil Éireann. It has been left to voluntary groups, community groups, trade unions, local authorities and non-governmental organisations to inform us of this matter and bring it to our attention. This far-reaching agreement is known as the EU-Canada Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement, CETA, the agreement that dare not speak its name in this Chamber. Fortunately, the public-driven awareness campaign throughout Europe has alerted us to what is going on. There are serious concerns being expressed by Germany, Austria, Hungary and Belgium, to name but a few of the countries, about the agreement. Moreover, the European Court of Justice is examining the EU–Singapore free trade agreement, another new generation deal intrinsically related to CETA. The ruling in this case which will be significant is expected in the spring and shall have significant implications and consequences for how CETA is applied. The Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation has acknowledged that the outcome of this case will have an impact on the scope of the provisional application of CETA. Effectively, the Government is planning to allow the Commission to sign up, in our name, next week to provisional application of the agreement and find out what this actually means in the springtime.

I realise the Government is under pressure from the President of the European Commission, Mr. Juncker, although it did stand up to him in the case of Apple when it suited it. Mr. Juncker is on record as saying the credibility of the European Union's trade policy is at stake. What is at stake is the credibility of our democratic system if the Government allows such an agreement to be signed. In this regard, as the Minister is aware, a recent Red C poll commissioned by Uplift Ireland and which is of help to him informs us that 74% of the population of the country who still believe in democracy want a referendum not only on CETA but also on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, TTIP. Moreover, the Seanad has passed a motion calling on us not to sign the agreement and, more importantly, to uphold Article 29.5.2° of the Constitution. That article sets out that the State shall not be bound by any international agreement involving a charge on public funds unless the terms of the agreement have been approved by Dáil Éireann. Clearly, the agreement's allowing of businesses and companies to sue states will have serious implications for the public purse. In the circumstances, I am asking the Minister, as a democrat, not to sign up to it. Moreover, he should immediately instigate a frank and open debate in this Chamber.

I thank the Deputy for her question. It is important to bear in mind that well over 200,000 Irish jobs are directly dependent on our trade. In the face of Brexit, which will put pressure on companies selling into the UK market, it is important that Irish businesses gain access to other markets such as the Canadian market. This is an agreement which has been negotiated between the European Union and Canada to allow greater entry to the Canadian market for certain products such as Irish dairy products which, as the Deputy knows, have been blocked. It would open the market to many other Irish companies selling manufactured and other goods. The Canadian market is a good one. It is one in respect of which there is a lot of common knowledge and understanding of the trading approaches adopted. This is an area in which Irish business will use the opportunities provided by the removal of non-trade barriers and the reduction of tariffs to allow Irish companies to create employment. That will be important in the coming years. We need a strong trading economy to enable us to work our way out of our current position.

In principle, the agreements with Canada, the United States and other states are to be welcomed. Of course, as in any negotiation, we must ensure our interests are protected.

Particular concerns have been raised about, for example, the dispute mechanisms surrounding investor agreements, which, I understand, have not been carried through into the Canadian agreement. There will be amendments to those sections and they have been agreed by the trade Ministers.

This trade agreement will be brought before the House for debate in the usual way when its details have been finalised. That is the approach that has always been taken in these agreements. Under EU law, the European Commission is responsible for the negotiations and it carries them out in an increasingly transparent way. Cecilia Malmström, the Swedish European Commissioner for Trade, has made huge efforts to make sure that trade unions and community groups, for example, get access to those papers in such a way that they can understand what is being negotiated. However, in the long term, a trade agreement is good for a small, open trading economy such as ours. We need those markets, particularly in light of Brexit. We need to look at the detail of this agreement and not to leap to the conclusion that any trade agreement is bad. We depend on trade agreements, and many overseas companies invest in Ireland because of the openness that we adopt to trade. I, therefore, ask the Deputy to suspend her judgment on this until we see the final document and the opportunities it presents and we protect ourselves against any risks. There are always risks in any negotiation.

I agree with the Minister on one point, namely, that we need to consider the details of the agreement. That is exactly what I am asking for, that we do not sign up to an agreement about which we know nothing but that we bring it before this House. Is CETA on such thin ice that it cannot withstand free speech and free debate? Is that what the Minister is saying in the context of new politics in this Dáil? I ask him not to sign up to this on 28 October, but to bring the matter before us so that we can discuss it. It is disingenuous of him to say that we need trade agreements and that they are good and to suggest that those of us who raise questions are not behind trade agreements. I am absolutely behind trade agreements and creating jobs in this country. In fact, there is a crisis in the regions because of a lack of jobs. This agreement has nothing to do with that. This trade agreement opens us up to neoliberal policies without any regulation. It opens up our public services and makes it extremely difficult for us, if we change Government in the future, to go back and bring public services back under public ownership. At the very least, if the Minister wants to stand by this agreement, he should bring it before us and let us discuss it in an open and fair manner.

Finally, I was horrified to learn just before I spoke that it would seem a French MEP has been refused entry into Canada because he was to speak on this agreement.

Go raibh maith agat, a Theachta.

I am not sure if that is entirely true, but that is what is being reported. If it is true, it certainly indicates-----

Go raibh maith agat, a Theachta.

-----how difficult it is to raise any awareness about these trade agreements.

Tá do chuid ama caite.

It is important to recognise that this agreement, even before the negotiating started, guaranteed under its terms that no public service could be interfered with. It guaranteed that there could be no diminution in health, safety or workers' or other rights as a result of the agreement. It provided for protection for many of the things about which people are concerned. Of course, there has been agreement which will open up sectors, so Irish food companies, including those in the Deputy's area, will have opportunities to trade into the Canadian market, which is to be welcomed. The Minister has been very alert to the concerns expressed in this House, and there have been debates on these agreements before Deputy Connolly's time.

No, there have not.

This has been an issue for some time. As the Deputy knows, the agreement has been negotiated over a number of years, so the Minister is very alert to those concerns, as are other Ministers. Modifications have been made to the agreement to take into account public concerns. It will come back for ratification in the House, as normal, and the Deputy will recognise the value of it.

For the record, there has been no debate on CETA until now.