I am returning to an issue I tabled as a Commencement matter yesterday regarding the important decisions being made today at the European Council in respect of a new proposed trading agreement between the EU and Morocco. Sadly, the information I received in answer to the Commencement matter yesterday was actually inaccurate in that I was told the issue was still being negotiated. I asked what position Ireland would be taking and was told it was still being negotiated when in fact, negotiations had concluded. This raises its own questions because we were told the mandate to negotiate was given by the Council to the Commission on 10 September and the negotiations, we were told, were concluded on 18 September. That means that in a one-week period the Council was finally given a mandate, prior to which it had no mandate to act, and then magically concluded this entire trade agreement in one week. Yet when I asked about it, I was told negotiations are ongoing. In fact, we have been told negotiations have been concluded, with severe question marks over them, and the decision on signing is today.

Was that in your reply?

The inaccurate information was in the response to my reply. I did not have the opportunity to come back at that time. That is why I am following it up now. I would like to have a debate in the House. I hoped to deal with it through a Commencement matter but now I believe it requires a debate in the House because the decisions being made on this trade agreement are directly relevant to the positions Ireland has taken on international law.

This goes to the substantial issue. The reason for a renegotiation was that the European Court of Justice found that the agreement between the EU and Morocco was including the occupied territories of Western Sahara in relation to which Morocco did not have a mandate to sign trade agreements. The clear decision was that the Sahrawi people of Western Sahara would need to be consulted and that, implicitly or explicitly, any trade agreement should be to their benefit and it should be their decision.

The decision was made not to seek explicit permission, even though Ireland claims we want to see referendums and self-determination for the people of Western Sahara. However, it seems we made no push to say they should even have self-determination on this question of whether to have this new trade deal. The solution being put forward is extraordinary. It is that trade will intensify with the Western Sahara region, including with Moroccan settlers and Moroccan companies who are extracting resources from it. This is literally like responding in relation to the West Bank by saying there is a problem here in terms of the Palestinian people so we will intensify our trade with Israeli settlers. That is the direct comparison. Ireland has been clear that that is not in line with international law.

I want to know what Ireland is doing on the very comparable issue of Western Sahara. Rather than being fobbed off by being told it is still in the air, when we know it is not, I want to know what Ireland is saying in the room on this issue. I would like a debate on that, and a Minister to come into the House.

To clarify, did the response received by the Senator yesterday outline that the decision at the Council on the agreement was going to be today?

No. It said that negotiations are ongoing.

That is what the Senator was told.

Yes. I know they were not. The vote is today.

But that was not in the reply.

No. I was simply asking-----

Will the Senator send me what she received?

Certainly. That is a minor point, to be honest. I will send it on because accuracy is important, of course, but the key point is for the substantial issue to be discussed. It is very relevant to the position Ireland has taken on international law and its application.

For the benefit of Members, if Members put in Commencement matters, they should receive up-to-date information. Whatever the reply is, if something is happening today and the Senator got a reply yesterday in which that information was not included, I think-----

It was inaccurate. I really just wanted to know what Ireland would be doing when the vote took place rather than what will be in the agreement, which had already been finalised.