I wish Senators a good evening. I am pleased to introduce the Israeli Settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (Prohibition of Importation of Goods) Bill 2026 to the Seanad. I acknowledge in particular the role played by Senator Black and others in advancing the issues that are at the very core of this legislation. The Bill has generated debate not just within the Oireachtas but across Irish society and internationally. The depth of feeling in this House and also in the Dáil is shared and understood by me and by the Government. I have just returned from a visit to Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the UAE where this issue and the wider conflicts in the Middle East were very much on the agenda and to the fore of our discussions and my reason for being there. From speaking to those in the Gulf who are impacted by these conflicts but who are very much working towards a peaceful solution, not just in Iran but in Lebanon and the West Bank, it is very clear they are very focused, as we are, on the advancement of a two-state solution and that was to the fore of our discussions.

Before discussing the detail of this legislation it is important - as we all will do - to reflect on why we are here. This Bill is about real people whose lives have been shaped by conflict, displacement and occupation. As Senators will know, in the West Bank in particular, the situation continues to deteriorate. Since the beginning of last year, tens of thousands of Palestinians have been displaced from their homes during Israeli military operations. Entire communities have seen homes, roads and essential infrastructure destroyed. What has replaced them is not what people might often imagine, namely tents or temporary structures. These are Israeli state-built homes; they are concrete homes, not tents. They are permanent fixtures. This year alone, there have already been more than 1,000 reported settler attacks. That is an average of six attacks every day. It is hard for any of us to imagine living in a community where every day brings the possibility of violence, intimidation or the destruction of our home or livelihood. For far too may Palestinians, that is simply everyday life and has been for some time.

In Gaza, humanitarian conditions remain dire, with the operating environment for humanitarian aid massively constrained by Israeli-imposed import restrictions. I saw this in January when I travelled to the border with Israel. It was made very clear to me that the rules that applied on Monday could be changed on Tuesday and changed again on Wednesday. Quite literally, food sat rotting, and very important material such as tents, equipment and children's play toys were not let in because of the types of material they were made of. This is not acceptable. Separate from legislation, in anything we do we must continue to advocate strongly internationally in order that enough humanitarian aid can get in and that rebuilding can start.

Mass displacement and poor shelter are exposing civilians to rising public health risks, which makes the need all the more urgent. The food security situation remains precarious. Other ongoing challenges include electricity and fuel shortages, water insecurity and much more. That is why the Government and I have consistently provided for and called for unhindered humanitarian access to people in Gaza. We will continue to do so. The actions of the Israeli Government consistently contravene international law. They are part of an established pattern to create a new status quo in the occupied Palestinian territory. In particular, they are designed explicitly to bury the idea of a two-state solution. This is happening by design as opposed to by accident. I think we all agree on that.

Ireland will always defend the right of the Palestinian people to a state consisting of Gaza and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem. Palestinians have the right to self-determination; the same right already enjoyed by Israelis. We are committed - as I think is everyone in this House - to working with those who want to achieve a just and lasting peace. We are committed to working with those who want to see Israelis and Palestinians living side by side and enjoying the same rights. Crucially, we are committed to working with those who believe that both peoples have the right to live in peace, security and dignity in two states - Israel and Palestine - based on the 1967 border.

After the three-day visit and the engagements I have just had and having come home to find the conflict in Iran igniting again, what is very clear is that none of this is predetermined. None of it is linear. Any progress that we make can be set back immediately. What is more complicated and more complex is that every conflict is interconnected. The conflict in Iran is connected with what is happening in Libya and with Gaza and the West Bank, Syria and beyond. The very clear message to me from our colleagues in the Gulf is that if we do not resolve the situation between Israelis and Palestinians and achieve the overall objective of a two-state solution, the wider conflict will continue for decades to come. That message makes me, and, I know, everybody in this House, even more determined that we would make progress.

The cycle of violence that has brought suffering to Palestinians and Israelis needs to be brought to an end. This Bill will contribute positively to Ireland's efforts and to international efforts to prevent unilateral actions that impinge on the rights of Palestinian people to self-determination and upon the viability of the two-state solution. It will also contribute positively to our efforts to uphold and comply with international law, including the findings of the 2024 advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice.

I will now outline the detailed provisions of the Bill, placing a particular focus on the key sections. Sections 1 and 2 are standard provisions setting out the relevant definitions and how the related regulations and orders will be dealt with.

Section 3 empowers the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, following consultation with the Minister for Finance, to proscribe by order certain postal codes that correspond to Israeli settlements. It should be noted that these postal codes are already set out under a technical arrangement concluded between the EU and the Government of Israel. This is to ensure that importers are aware of which locations are not eligible for preferential tariff treatment under the EU-Israel Association Agreement. As the postal codes listed under the EU-Israel technical arrangement are periodically updated, section 4 will allow the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, following consultation with the Minister for Finance, to amend or replace the list of proscribed postal codes. If new settlements are constructed, they will therefore be captured by the updated list of postal codes at an EU level, and our own list of proscribed postal codes will be updated accordingly. Practically speaking, the approach set out develops and updates Ireland's implementation of the existing obligations placed upon operators and customs authorities to distinguish between goods from the State of Israel and settlement goods under the EU-Israel technical arrangement in order to ensure compliance with international law.

Section 5 prohibits the importation of goods originating in postal codes proscribed by order of the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade. Any such importation will therefore become an offence under section 14 of the Customs Act 2015. In and of itself, the Bill does not create any new offences. It is proposed that, under this legislation, goods originating in Israeli settlements would become goods subject to any prohibition or restriction on importation within the meaning of that phrase for the purposes of the 2015 Customs Act. Once the Bill is enacted and commenced, it will be an offence under section 14 of the Customs Act to import settlement goods and the provisions of that Act concerning search, seizure and forfeiture will be available in respect of settlement goods.

Sections 6 and 7 deal with possible exemptions and appeals. As already stated, a list of postal codes that correspond to Israeli settlements are already set out under a technical arrangement concluded between the EU and the Government of Israel. Some of these postal codes encompass an area that includes both a settlement area, and an area within Israel proper, and therefore even under the current system they already require some basic checks to determine the precise origin of the goods. Section 6 is aimed at addressing this issue. An importer from one of these postal codes can apply to the Revenue Commissioners for an exemption if their goods originate in the non-settlement part of the listed postal code. Before issuing such an exemption, the Revenue Commissioners will make inquiries to ascertain the precise origin of the goods. The process for checking more or less replicates the current system. To facilitate the implementation of this process, section 7 sets out the amendments to be made to section 45 of the Customs Act 2015 to allow for the importer to be notified of the decision of the Revenue Commissioners and to provide the importer with the right to appeal.

Section 8 provides for information sharing and is designed to allow the relevant bodies to work together to effectively enforce the Bill. The remaining sections are all relatively standard provisions and deal with issues such as data protection and other issues.

The pre-legislative scrutiny report was very helpful in the further development of the Bill. The report's recommendations were carefully considered and we have taken action in response to a number of the recommendations. This includes our strong advocacy for action at the EU level, where I have co-ordinated with like-minded member states to advance all of the issues of mutual concern. I have also ensured that our missions abroad have communicated very clearly the purpose of this Bill and our wider policy in relation to the Middle East, and as many of my colleagues have, I have engaged with all relevant Departments and agencies in regard to its implementation.

In respect of the report's recommendation regarding the inclusion of services - I appreciate that this is where there is obviously most focus and difference - we have studied this issue carefully. The Government sought and received advice from the Attorney General regarding the legal permissibility of an EU member state introducing restrictions relating to trade in services with a third country or territory. There are two principal issues in relation to services: the legal basis available under EU law, and the practical challenges relating to implementation and enforcement. In the case of goods, a public policy exemption exists within the relevant EU framework governing imports, allowing member states to adopt restrictions for public policy reasons. There is no equivalent broad public policy basis in EU law in relation to external trade in services. Trade in services differs fundamentally from trade in goods. We all know that services are often digital, cross-border and intangible in nature, operating across multiple legal and regulatory frameworks, creating very significant implementation and enforcement challenges.

What the Government must do and what I, as Minister, must do is ensure that any measures adopted are not only politically meaningful but also legally defensible, practically enforceable and mindful of Ireland's wider economic and employment interests. For these reasons, the Government has adopted a two-pronged approach. At national level, we are proceeding with measures on goods that can be effectively implemented and sustained in practice. However, I will continue to push for collective action at EU level because this is the strongest and most effective route.

I have pushed for action for some time since coming into this role. It is important to stress that at the first meeting I attended last November, a handful of countries - Ireland and possibly three or four others - were advocating for any type of meaningful change, any type of meaningful proposal from the Commission or any type of action full stop. In advocating and working with our colleagues from Spain and Slovenia, and more recently from France, Portugal, Sweden and beyond, we have seen that shift. At the last meeting I attended, at least 17 member states were very clear and adamant in wanting the Commission to bring forward stronger proposals. In that time, we have voted for sanctions on violent settlers and for sanctions on those responsible for the Hamas attacks.

We are advocating for the Commission to bring forward proposals. What was committed to at the last meeting was that it would bring forward a list of options for consideration at the upcoming Foreign Affairs Council meeting that will take place on Monday. I expect that we will get those proposals today, or at the latest tomorrow, so we can consider them for the upcoming Council. At this meeting, I will be strongly pressing for action. As I have said, I am not clear that there is a consensus or an overall majority when it comes to any vote on this, but I am clear that there is a certainly a shift or a change. That is why we have advocated for changes in trade, so that we could apply QMV and have a much stronger and better chance of making progress at a European level.

That is the only thing, if anything, that will make the Israeli Government sit up and listen. I welcome that a number of member states have enacted measures, and others are progressing similar legislative measures on goods originating in Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territory. This includes Spain, but the Netherlands and Belgium are also moving, and we know that Norway is working on legislation. Other non-member state countries have engaged directly with me and asked about our legislation and how we are moving this forward.

That is what we have always been trying to do here: to gather that momentum and make sure that others are moving with us, that we are sending as strong a message as possible that what is happening is not acceptable, and that the EU takes a stronger position. I do not believe we have been strong enough. We all agree on that. We need to make sure that we are standing up and that we are accountable. During our Presidency, that is what I will be advocating for. We were the first EU country to announce our intention to prohibit the importation of settlement goods. I again acknowledge Senator Frances Black and many others for their work on that. We also stated very clearly at the time that we hoped this would encourage other countries to follow our example. That is exactly what has happened and is happening.

I look forward to working with colleagues in a constructive way. I look forward to ensuring that Ireland's concerns and our strong commitment to bringing about a peaceful solution are well heard and understood, not just in the context of our Presidency. I think we all agree on what we are trying to do here. Many of us in the Chamber have visited the West Bank and Gaza many times. We have been in the region and have seen the devastation this war is causing. We have seen the ongoing devastation, despite the fact that there is a ceasefire. We only want one outcome, which is a peaceful solution between Israel and Palestine, that Israelis and Palestinians can live side by side, and that the conflict that is quite literally tearing families apart, that sees children being killed and targeted and starving to death, just stops. That is what we are all trying to achieve. While some feel this legislation may not go far enough, I believe we are making progress and contributing towards that overall objective. For my part, I will continue to fight at a European level so that we can do more.

I thank the Minister for bringing this important legislation to the House. We have an opportunity to discuss it today and we will have an opportunity next week on Committee and Remaining Stages to discuss it in more detail.

I acknowledge our colleague in the House, Senator Frances Black, for the work she has done on this in recent years. She and some of the other experts in this Chamber have educated me in recent months on this Bill that she started and progressed. Many people did not expect it to get this far, even when it was put into the programme for Government, and the Minister was the one leading our group in putting forward the programme for Government. I do not think many people thought it would be delivered, but we have progressed it.

Obviously, there are differing views on how far we go, but this is a real statement from Ireland in standing up against genocide and actions that are against international law. As a member of the foreign affairs committee, I acknowledge the good work of all 14 members of that committee this time last year, when we spent more than 30 hours discussing this legislation. We did it in a collective way and produced a report, although we did not have the Attorney General's advice at the time. Nonetheless, we produced a report that was helpful for the Minister when putting forward this Bill.

As the Minister said, everyone can see the images of what has happened in recent years since 7 October. We could not help but be outraged by the atrocities that are happening and the people who are dying, in particular, the children who are dying. Over 20,000 children have died, more than 2,000 of them under the age of one. They are clearly not members of Hamas or any terrorist organisation. They are the innocent victims of a brutal attack on people simply because of where they are from.

That is why Ireland has played a leading role in recent years in calling out the actions of Israel, and in calling for other member states to join us in calling out this atrocity. We were one of the first states to recognise the State of Palestine, to recognise its ambassador and to join the South African ICJ case. As the Minister said in her contribution, one of the most important things that we have done in the past 12 or 18 months, and that Deputy McEntee has done as Minister, with some of her colleagues, is to convince so many member states to review the EU-Israel Association Agreement. If we are looking to have a real impact on Israel economically, that is significant and important. As the Minister said, to go from two or three countries only 12 or 18 months ago to having 17 countries open to this is a cause for huge optimism.

I was in Germany recently speaking to parliamentarians there. Unfortunately, they see things differently. It can be quite depressing talking to them sometimes. I know the history and the view they have, but it seems incredible that they are still not open to discussing it. I know the Minister is working hard. I know the other foreign affairs ministers of Europe are working hard to try to convince them. That is important, and what we do here is important. As the Minister said in her contribution, when other countries are asking about the legislation that we are bringing forward, asking to look at it to see what they can do, it shows the kind of leading role that we are playing. We also saw that in the foreign affairs committee when speaking to Palestinian officials, who thanked Ireland for the role it is playing.

There has been a lot of talk about this legislation, for obvious reasons. It can be very emotive. I can understand why people wanted services to be included. However, there are frameworks around the decisions that we make as a Government, which is important to note. The Attorney General's advice is very important, and that is why it was in the report that we needed the Attorney General's advice. That advice trumps any expert or academic opinions in terms of how a Government makes decisions. We cannot act on legislation knowing that the advice being given is different.

I welcome the fact that the Minister is trying to work with EU partners to do something in this regard. Many people say that we are possibly in breach of EU law by not including services, but that is not entirely the case. The ICJ opinion provides us with an opportunity under EU law and allows for public policy moves only in respect of goods, not services.

That is important to acknowledge. Sometimes it is not mentioned. When we talk about other states having included services, the first thing is that we are the first Parliament in Europe, hopefully, to pass any legislation and that is very significant. Norway is doing something but it is not part of the EU and so is not bound by the Single Market rules. The Netherlands have started legislation but it is only at a public consultation stage. Belgium is drafting legislation. Slovenia had a general election recently and the new Government has dropped plans, which also included services. The important thing here is that this is a massive statement that I think other countries will follow our lead on. We can do more from a European level, the more of an impact that will have on this conflict. At the end of the day, what everyone wants - and there is a united approach on this - is an end to a conflict where innocent children are being slaughtered and murdered almost on a daily basis. The work the Minister does behind the scenes plays a key role in that and I thank her for it.

Next week we will have an opportunity on Committee and Report Stages to go into the finer detail of it. From my perspective, over the last year in the foreign affairs committee, working with colleagues from both sides, we have developed a huge passion to try to make an impact that can go worldwide and encourage other countries to deliver on that. I want to thank people who gave their time to the foreign affairs committee to help and support us in delivering that report.

Before I call on the next speaker, I welcome family members of the Ceann Comhairle, Deputy Verona Murphy. You are most welcome to Seanad Éireann. We also have Linda and Conor McManus, who are part of a group of families of those who were the last prisoners of the War of Independence to be released. The were known as the Peterhead Ten. Many of them suffered in the prison in north-east Scotland, in Aberdeenshire, where there were held until 100 years ago. They were released in 1926, many years after the War of Independence and all other prisoners had been released. Those prisoners were: Sean Flood; Jim Davis; William Reilly; Joseph Lee; Frank Reilly; John Kiernan; Bernie Sweeney; Charlie Reynolds; John Joe Griffin and Joseph Reynolds. The very last prisoner released was a Thomas McShea who may have served in Seanad Éireann for six months. He was from Bundoran, in County Donegal. I thank Senator Cosgrove, who brought many of the family members to Leinster House today as part of the recognition of their service all those years ago. This recognition is long overdue. I thank Linda and Conor and all the family members who are here in Seanad Éireann today.

Gabhaim buíochas leis an gCathaoirleach. Is mór é domsa an Bille seo a fheiceáil ar an gclár inniu. Is fada an t-achar ó tháinig sé os ár gcomhair i bhfoirm eile in 2018. Is fearr déanach ná go brách, i ndáiríre. Is mian liom tagairt a dhéanamh den mhéid oibre atá déanta ag mo chomhghleacaí, an Seanadóir Frances Black. Rinne sí sárobair ar an gcás seo agus d’oibrigh sí go dúthrachtach ag cur na hargóinte chun cinn, ag déanamh oideachais agus ag feabhsú an cháis i measc na Seanadóirí agus níos forleithne ná sin.

After a long gestation, this Bill is being introduced and falls within the category more of gesture than efficacy. That is not to say the Bill is not important or worthwhile. Nor is it a dissipation of precious parliamentary time, as some hereabouts might claim. No, it has, and may well have in times to come, a significance and prominence way beyond the parameters of our Houses, coming, as it does, from a widespread feeling of unease at the very lowest gradation and across-the-board revulsion amid our people at the mindset of the current Israeli Government and its smiting of the Palestinian people and the decimation of their homelands over the past three years, in particular.

In June 2027, it will be 60 years since the Six-Day War, when most of Ireland and much of the western world celebrated heartily the outstanding Israeli blitzkrieg against Egypt, Jordan and Syria. It was then, plucky little Israel against the combined might of the Arab hordes. Some of us here are old enough to remember those times quite well. Lest we forget, it was a victory enabled by our now European colleagues in France who armed Israel to the teeth. Those Mirage, Mystère, Ouragan and Vautour aircraft and the undoubted skills of the Israeli aircrews generated that famous victory. The end of the brief conflict saw Israel take control of the Sinai Peninsula and the Gaza Strip, captured from Egypt, the West Bank and East Jerusalem, captured from Jordan and the Golan Heights, captured from Syria. Inevitably, it also gave rise to possibly up to half a million Palestinian refugees and the first postwar iteration of the so-called West Bank settler dimension that was somewhat lessened by the disengagement policy of Ariel Sharon and his Government in 2005, which saw settlements closed completely in the northern West Bank, around the area of Homesh.

Prime Minister Netanyahu took office in December 2022, with 22 of his 25 Cabinet members from the Likud, Shas, United Torah Judaism, the Religious Zionist Party, Otzma Yehudit, Noam and New Hope parties. His emboldened Minister of Justice, Yariv Levin, announced within a week that the Government was immediately setting about a multi-part restructuring of the country's legal system. This set off mass protests in Israel that continued for months. Through the springtime, while the media and the public at large were, so to speak, looking the other way, the legal framework created by the 2005 disengagement was significantly altered in March 2023 and slipped through. The Knesset passed legislation that revoked the ban on Israelis entering the evacuated West Bank areas, thus opening the door for settlers to return to these specific sites, such as Homesh in the northern section. This marked a major reversal of the 2005 policy of disengagement.

During the past three and a half years, the Israeli Government has accelerated the de facto annexation of the West Bank through a systematic transformation of the control regime. This includes settlement expansion, the displacement of Palestinian communities, the retroactive legalisation of outposts and increased control over areas previously the responsibility of the Palestinian Authority. The Government has provided extensive and sustained funding, particularly for unauthorised outposts, while retroactively legalising them and facilitating the takeover of the land.

Between 2023 and 2025, 185 new outposts were established in the West Bank, most of them agricultural settlements and so-called Hilltop Youth outposts. Together, they now control more than 1 million dunams or approximately 250,000 acres, or about 18% of the total area of the West Bank. One hundred and eighteen Palestinian communities and shepherding clusters, that is, residential areas, some of which are part of those same communities, were systematically displaced. The residents left their homes due to settler violence, restrictions on access to water and a lack of protection from the authorities, which prevents Palestinians from returning.

Settlers erected fences along roads spanning at least 50 km. Massive fences were placed, mainly in the Jordan Valley and in areas used by those communities, thereby, in effect, cutting off hundreds of thousands of dunams of land. In recent times, settlers have taken control of at least 11,000 dunams, or approximately 3,000 acres, of agricultural land, including fields, orchards and vineyards. Until recently, much of that land was cultivated by Palestinians, who have been latterly either displaced from the area or prevented from accessing their property.

That takes us to the nub of what we are talking about today. How should we regard and deal with what is now becoming an everyday reality on the West Bank? The Bill before us is a response, albeit a far from perfect one, to the predations of the Israeli Cabinet, spurred on by its cheerleaders, Smotrich and Ben-Gvir, and, of course, ably buttressed by a Prime Minister who fiendishly clings to power with the support of the aforementioned apartheid notables. As I said at the outset, the Bill is more symbolic than tangible. It is a measure with which we in Ireland can display to the world our belief in the immorality and illegality of Israel's actions in the West Bank. Whether it deals with produce or produce and services, it is still likely, because of the quantum involved, to be just what I said, namely, a largely symbolic gesture.

However, symbolism is hugely important. It is important beyond belief before the eyes of the world. We cannot just stand idly by and allow a wholesale land grab in the West Bank to rip ahead and not, as a people, decry such behaviour before a disbelieving world. For that reason, the Bill merits support. As the Minister said, it will very definitely focus the attention of many nations, particularly our European partners, on the Israeli plans to scupper for all time the two-state solution long held dear by right-thinking people. In so doing, any tentative hope of peace in our time sa Mheánoirthear becomes further from reality. As the Minister said, it is a widely accepted fact that, unless this problem is sorted out once and for all, there will never be peace in that area or, indeed, anywhere in the world.

I thank the Minister for coming to the Chamber this afternoon. I am speaking on behalf of Senator O'Loughlin, who is at a meeting of the foreign affairs committee. One does not need to be a member of that committee to have empathy and compassion on this issue. I really appreciate that, while the Minister's statement was very detailed, it included her sharing her experience of having travelled to the region and seeing for herself what we see on our televisions every night. It is absolutely heartbreaking. I thank her, as well as the entire Cabinet, including the Taoiseach and Tánaiste, for the work she and her officials did in bringing this Bill before us. Many believed this debate would not happen.

Fianna Fáil welcomes and supports the Bill. Under our leadership, Ireland has been one of the most prominent voices in the world in the condemnation of violence in the Middle East, support for relief efforts and advocacy for a two-state solution. It would be wrong of me not to acknowledge the role that Senator Black has played in this also. We led the way by recognising the State of Palestine in May 2024. The late Brian Lenihan Snr. was the first foreign minister in Europe to recognise the Palestinian right to a homeland. We firmly believe that there can be no peace in the Middle East until the Israeli and Palestinian people align in enjoying the same rights of self-determination, statehood, peace, security and dignity.

Before the 2024 general election, my party leader signalled that he would legislate on the occupied Palestinian territories. Our position, and that of the EU, is clear. Settlements are illegal under international law and they undermine the realisation of the two-state solution. We are now progressing the Israeli Settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (Prohibition of Importation of Goods) Bill and will seek to enact it by the summer recess. Ireland has continually advocated for a peaceful resolution to the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians. We have consistently sought to progress implementation of the two-state solution. It is clear from the actions of the Israeli Government both in Gaza and the West Bank that it has no intention of reaching a peaceful resolution to conflict or ending the illegal occupation of Palestinian territory.

That is why we are progressing this Bill. The Government's position, and that of the EU, is clear that settlements are illegal under international law and they undermine the realisation of the two-state solution. While Ireland is moving ahead at national level, the Government remains clear that collective action at EU level is the strongest and most effective route. Ireland is actively pursuing that collective approach at the EU. We have called for the suspension of the trade element of the EU-Israel Association Agreement and, together with other member states, we are pressing for the Commission to put forward a proposal for an EU-level ban on trade with Israeli settlements, for decision at the Foreign Affairs Council next week, which the Minister has said she will attend. Ireland welcomed political agreement at the May Foreign Affairs Council on a package of sanctions against violent Israeli settlers and entities, as well as leading Hamas figures, under the EU global human rights sanctions regime.

However, further action is required. At both the May Foreign Affairs Council and the May Foreign Affairs Council in its Trade configuration, Ireland requested that the European Commission bring forward proposals for a prohibition on trade with settlements on the basis of the EU common commercial policy. The Government also reiterated Ireland's long-standing position that the EU-Israel Association Agreement should be suspended or, at a minimum, the trade elements should be suspended. On 20 May, the Taoiseach wrote to the President of the European Council, Mr. Costa, reiterating Ireland's position on EU trade with Israel and requesting an urgent discussion on these issues among EU leaders at the next meeting of the European Council on 18 and 19 June. A number of EU member states have enacted or are progressing similar measures relating to goods originating in Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territory, including Spain, the Netherlands and Belgium, with Norway indicating its consideration of similar restrictions.

The extent of the work the Minister has done since coming to office, working with other EU member states, is absolutely clear. This time last year, there were a handful of countries stating an intention to act; the number is now expanding considerably, which is really welcome. As part of our EU Presidency, it will be very welcome to see this agenda progressed.

I will not go through the different sections of the Bill, which the Minister has already done. I look forward to contributing on Committee Stage next week, as does Senator O'Loughlin. I thank the Minister for her time this afternoon.

I thank the Minister for coming to the House. The Government's position is unbelievably disappointing and demoralising for people who believe in politics and supporting the rule of international law. As Senator Conway said, it is gesture politics. It is disappointing that the Government is, in effect, gutting what could have been good legislation. It was never going to be a magic wand but it gave Ireland the opportunity to lead and to say to Israel that we saw it and we would not accept the genocide, apartheid and other horrors it was committing, including the slaughter of more than 20,000 children. It was a chance to say to Israel that its actions were not acceptable.

Instead of doing that, the Government has gutted Senator Black's Bill and made it meaningless in effect. Nobody will be happy with this legislation, including people who support international law.

A ban on trade in goods alone does not meet our obligations under international law, and the Government has recognised this, yet it is not willing to go further and seek to ensure that we meet our obligations under international law. Recently, the Minister said very clearly in committee that this would go towards compliance. It will go towards compliance but we have an opportunity to actually comply with international law. What is the reason for not doing so? Why are we waiting so long? The Government has been pushing back against the occupied territories Bill for almost ten years now. It has failed to hold Israel to account for ten years.

I heard Senator Ahearn give a list of measures taken in support of Palestine and Palestinians. Each one of those was positive and good, but recognising the State of Palestine did not actually hold Israel to account. Israel did not like it, but it did not mean that it faced any consequences. It is like when Ireland allocates funding for rebuilding or building schools in the West Bank or Gaza. That is positive but the trouble is that Israel knocks them a week later and Ireland does not hold it to account. It is absolutely demoralising.

If Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael had any intention of holding Israel to account for its breaches of international law, for its unspeakable crimes going back decades, for its genocide, occupation and slaughter, the occupied territories Bill would have been made law years ago. I remember, foolish me, that I actually believed before the last election that the Government was genuinely going to introduce the occupied territories Bill. I believed there was a real possibility. How foolish was I, and how foolish were the people who voted for and supported Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael in the belief that they would do that? Of course, we should have known better, because within months it became clear that the Government, Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael, had no intention of passing the occupied territories Bill as introduced by Senator Black and her colleagues in the Seanad.

Instead, the Government has subjected the Irish people to bizarre doublespeak in which it has tried to shut down the Bill at every turn while at the same time pretending to be committed to it. What we have been presented with here today is a gutted, watered-down version. It is a fraudulent copy of Senator Black's occupied territories Bill. The decision to exclude services from what the Government's Bill proposes to sanction is a complete disgrace. Services account for the vast majority of trade between Ireland and the occupied Palestinian territories, and ignoring that fact for the sake of the Government's Bill is blatant hypocrisy.

The legal reasons for excluding services are extremely weak, and they seem to hinge on the word of the Attorney General. It is important to remember that the Attorney General is a political appointee. He is not a judge and his opinion can change. There are countless other legal opinions suggesting the Government does not have to go down this road.

The Government has said that it is legally impossible to include a ban on services, meaning it cannot even try. Why does it not try? Why does it not let somebody take a challenge in the courts and say they are complying with international law and that if the Government feels differently, it should be fought out in the courts? I believe Ireland would win and the Government would have some credibility. Sadly, that is not the way of the current Government.

The Government talks about it being legally impossible to pass the occupied territories Bill, but that did not stop Spain from introducing restrictions on services last year. Spain was able to introduce a ban on services. The Irish Government goes on about how it is leading the way and looking for consensus, yet it was afraid to copy and follow the example of Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez and the Spanish Government. It could have built an alliance. That could have created momentum within the EU to show it is possible to introduce a proper occupied territories Bill.

Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael should be upfront and say that their decision to exclude services was a deliberate political decision and not a legal necessity. Let us be honest about it: this is not a legal position because, as I said, there are many legal counterarguments. It is a political decision. The Government has been very clear that successive American Governments, Democrats and Republicans alike, have put pressure on the Irish Government to stop this legislation. It has been putting significant pressure on the Irish Government to put its morals to one side and give up any attempt to stand up against Israel. This Bill, which is now weak because of what the Irish Government has done to it, is an example of it caving in to American pressure while trying to save face with the Irish public. The only reason the Government is introducing this watered-down, gutted version of the occupied territories Bill is the Irish people. They recognise that the Irish Government is not willing to confront and hold Israel to account. In reality, this Bill will fail to appease the radical Zionists in America, and it will not appease those in this country and abroad who care about human rights.

Ireland has the opportunity to show leadership on the global stage by leading by example and taking a stand against Israel's crimes. The international community, the US, the EU and much of the Middle East are happy to sit idly by while Israel bombs and murders without restraint. Tens of thousands have been killed in Israel's genocide in Gaza. Over 25,000 children have been slaughtered by Israel. Hundreds of thousands more have been subjected to the most inhumane conditions, deprived of basic levels of food, water and shelter, and that continues. The genocide might not be at the chaotic level it was at previously, but there is still genocide happening in Gaza. That makes it even more important that measures be taken to ensure Israel is held to account.

The world's powers are failing in their collective duty to stand up for the principles of international law and human rights that were supposed to underpin the modern era. We hear the Government talking about international law and building towards compliance, and saying it has been great to the Palestinians, but it is not great at holding Israel to account. With this flimsy piece of legislation, the Irish Government is also failing in its duty. We could and should be leading the way.

As Senator Conway said, this is gesture politics at its best.

Before I call the next speaker, I welcome guests of Deputy Catherine Callaghan, and also, from the University of Galway, a group who are guests of Deputy Mairéad Farrell. I think they are here about economic policy. I also welcome the guests of Deputy Holly Cairns. They are all welcome to Seanad Éireann.

I call Senator Harmon. Is she sharing time?

I am sharing time.

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire. This is a moment that requires courage and political leadership from the Government. When we look to the past and see moments where people took stands, we note it was because they had courage in the moment. It is not something that can be applied retrospectively.

I commend Senator Frances Black on introducing the occupied territories Bill initially. I acknowledge Mr. Conor O'Neill, who was in the Gallery, for the work he has done in relation to this.

Where do we even start? The Minister is on the record during the Committee Stage debate on 23 June as saying it was clear that this legislation would amount to partial compliance and that we would have to work more at a European level to ensure full compliance.

Spain has taken further actions on services and advertising, in particular, so there is no reason Ireland cannot be stronger. Similarly, we sanctioned Russia when it occupied parts of Ukraine in 2014. Can that not be applied now to Israeli services following its occupation?

The Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission has said very clearly that there is no legal basis for excluding services. These are legal experts who are telling us that there is no legal basis there. The Attorney General's is one perspective. There are many other legal perspectives saying that it can absolutely be done.

This proposal is not without meaning, but certainly falls far short of what we need and what the people of Palestine need. This has been going on for too long. I am dismayed hearing what the Government side has said in the Chamber. I have heard references to "practical challenges" and "frameworks" around decisions. Those words were used. Future generations will not judge us on what was administratively convenient. They will judge us on what was the right thing to do. I have said a million times that we will be judged by future generations when they ask us what we did. I do not think that we are doing enough. I do not know if it is the Minister's personal preference but I do not think that the Government, as a whole, is doing enough in this regard. We have clear obligations from the International Court of Justice, ICJ, in relation to this. It is absolutely crystal clear that this is not going far enough.

They say that the arc of history bends towards justice, but ultimately it only bends if you make it bend. We need to make it bend because what is happening is that too many people in the world are turning a blind eye to genocide and to the rogue state of Israel, which is committing crimes against humanity. We will be judged as the politicians of our time. It is one of the biggest global issues of our time as public representatives and this is a time to do as much as we can. We are so far removed from it here. This is the absolute least that we can do as a country. This country has suffered under colonial oppression and bears that in its own DNA. To look away from Palestine, to not do everything we can, is to look away from our own history and our own DNA. We need to act further on this issue.

Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire. I again commend Senator Black, who has been campaigning on this issue for a very long time. It is disappointing that we are here this evening without services included despite the very detailed recommendations of the Oireachtas joint committee, the views of many legal experts and the clear legal opinion of the ICJ from July 2024. In that decision, if we recall, the ICJ held that all states were under an obligation "to abstain from entering into economic or trade dealings ... and to take steps to prevent trade or investment relations" with the settlements. That is a clear statement. The court was clear that "trade" included goods and services, and even the Government and the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade's legal experts, who gave testimony at the Oireachtas committee, accepted that point.

I am surprised that the Government is presenting us with a Bill that excludes services. The Government used to tell us that it was for legal reasons. The argument continuously trotted out was that it was on the basis of the Attorney General's advice and that was despite the fact that the Attorney General's advice from 2024 made it very clear that there was no distinction made between goods and services. Indeed, when we look at the sanctions regime that Ireland signed up to in respect of Russia, it sanctions trade in both goods and services with Russia without any difficulty. If we look at the whole body of European law, there is a detailed body of case law and legislation specifically on the question of services.

The issue is not a legal one but a political one. In fairness, it has become even clearer from the remarks made by the Government in recent days that fear of the Trump Administration is driving the decision, with illogical arguments that the Trump Administration might just tolerate a Bill that bans goods but if were to bring forward a Bill that covered goods and services, it would somehow be a step too far. The ongoing genocide in Gaza, the annexation of the Palestinians in the West Bank and the occupied territories, and the human rights abuses now extending into southern Lebanon, show that Israel is a rogue state under the Netanyahu regime. A strong occupied territories Bill could resonate across Europe, particularly during our EU Presidency. Instead, we have a half-hearted attempt at holding Israel to account and history will not judge Europe kindly for our collective inaction on Gaza, the ongoing destruction of Palestine and the two state-solution.

The Aire is welcome. I commend Senator Black on all the work she has done. I welcome Brian and Conor O'Neill to the Gallery.

I do not wish to spend my time this evening stating the obvious, but in these circumstances, it is hard not to do so. Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territory are illegal. They have been ruled to be illegal not by me, Opposition parties, the Government or Senator Black, who, as everyone has acknowledged, brought forward a more perfect version of this Bill. Those settlements have been ruled illegal by the ICJ. This Bill only applies to the trade and importation of goods from the occupied territories. It does not apply to services or exports, yet the highest court available to the United Nations is unequivocal in stating that Israeli settlements in the occupied territories are illegal.

The same court, in paragraph 278 of its ruling, demanded that states should no more trade with these settlements and services than we should in goods. We should no more export services than we should import figs or dates. This is explicitly stated. All states are under an obligation "to abstain from entering into economic or trade dealings" and they are "to prevent trade or investment relations" with the settlements. It is not only our legal obligation not to engage in trade with the occupied territories in our own name, but it is also our legal obligation under international law to prevent others from doing so. If we do not comply with this paragraph of the ruling, we are in breach of international law.

In many ways, Ireland and Israel have similar economies. Both are modern, open economies with a much higher value on services than goods. This Bill only applies to the trade and importation of goods from the occupied territories. It does not apply to the importation or exportation of services. Ironically, there would be less of a breach of the ICJ ruling if we allowed the importation of goods and outlawed the export of services.

While the Government argued that EU law prevents us from acting, Spain has proven that if the will is there to outlaw the advertisement of services, such as Airbnb, it can be done under existing EU legislation. We, along with the rest of the EU, outlawed the trade of both goods and services in Russian-occupied parts of Ukraine within months of the invasion. We showed that the practical identification and outlawing of trade in services in specific geographical areas of a wider range was possible. Why do we not have the political will to do this to Israel? Senior Israelis have frequently slandered Ireland and our leaders, including the Taoiseach, Deputy Micheál Martin, the Tánaiste, Deputy Simon Harris, and former President Michael D. Higgins, as being antisemitic. It goes without saying that we, as a State, and those three individuals are not antisemitic. I trust and hope that we will always continue to challenge the scourge antisemitism, just as with any other form of racism. These slurs are used as a form of bullying as a means to enrage US politicians and to direct our foreign policy. The consequences of these utterly untrue allegations have caused Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael and the Independents in government to prevaricate and it has deterred us from concrete economic actions that would underline our diplomatic criticism of the behaviour of the State of Israel and of its proxy militias among the settler movement.

Settler militias and settler-only units of the Israel Defense Forces, IDF, continue to extend the occupation to fresh areas of Palestinian land. They continue to expel the inhabitants and ethnically cleanse ever greater areas of Palestine. I, too, have been to Palestine. Our State is not the state that is guilty of systematic, genocidal racism. We should not be afraid to follow up our words with economic actions. The occupied territories Bill should include imports, exports, goods and services. Unfortunately, this weakened version before us today does less than half a job.

The Minister is welcome to the Chamber. To be honest, it is difficult to know where to begin with this speech because colleagues across the House and those who are watching from outside will know how important the occupied territories Bill has been to me over the past eight years and to my really good friend and colleague, Mr. Conor O'Neill, who was one of the original drafters of the Bill, along with Mr. Gerry Liston, the human rights lawyer. It was a privilege to work alongside Mr. O'Neill on this Bill.

It has taken a long time and a huge amount of work by many incredible organisations and activists to even get to this point.

There is a lot to say about the Bill before us. I will get to the technical detail in due course. First, I want to focus on what matters most, namely the human element of an injustice that is so stark that it should move the world to real and tangible action.

On the night of 14 March 2026, Ali Khaled Bani Odeh, tired from working long hours in construction, was finally home to mark the end of Ramadan with his wife, Waad, and their young family. His four sons, aged five to 11, were excited to see their father for the first time in over a month. They wanted something sweet and persuaded their parents to take them out for a drive to go for doughnuts, the kind of simple innocent request that any parent, any one of us, would recognising saying yes to. The second youngest child, Othman, was just six years of age. He was blind and unable to walk or feed himself and was sitting on his mother's lap in the front seat of the car. She asked her husband to pull over and take him briefly so that she could get something from a bag on the floor. As he did so, the boys noticed lasers shining in the car windows. Waad screamed. Ali, knowing what was coming, began to pray. Israeli soldiers opened fire on the family, spraying the car with bullets. They killed both parents and the two youngest children. A beautiful family of six was gunned down for absolutely nothing. They were massacred simply driving home after buying doughnuts. Why? There was absolutely no reason.

The two eldest brothers survived. Khaled, aged 11, described finding his siblings blood coated on his shoes. The younger of the two, Mustafa, is only eight. He told paramedics that he tried to pull his five-year-old brother towards him to protect him before realising that he was already dead. The two surviving boys are orphans now. Nothing will ever bring their parents or siblings back. I think of my grandchildren - I know we all think of our children and grandchildren - and how it is that we accept a world in which Palestinian people are treated as expendable. None of the Israeli soldiers who killed them and showed such sickening disregard for human life and dignity will ever face justice. There will be no real investigation and no trial. If that was in any other country, all hell would break loose.

I tell this story because it matters a thousand times more than any abstract legal principle and because it is not an isolated incident. This is the daily reality of life in occupied Palestine under a brutal and rotten system of apartheid, where there is absolutely no accountability, justice and certainly no peace. I have seen it with my own eyes in Hebron, Sheikh Jarrah and Masafer Yatta. It is something I will never forget. You cannot forget it. It is something I refuse to turn away from. The violence and cruelty are not an accidental by-product of the system; they are is actually its engine.

Right across the West Bank, Israeli settlers continue to attack, kill and displace Palestinians with near total impunity. Farmlands are being seized, homes are being stolen and illegal settlements are being established. The Government, the EU, the UN and the international courts repeatedly insist that this is totally illegal, but refuse to take the action needed to stop it. In fact, by continuing to trade with those settlements, we help to keep the show on the road. Whether we like it or not, until this obvious economic support ends - and I mean all of it, including goods and services - we will remain complicit. This is why, with my colleagues in the Seanad Civil Engagement Group, I first tabled the occupied territories Bill in 2018 to insist on a very simple principle, namely that no Irish company should profit from or contribute to war crimes that are happening on a daily basis. I cannot believe that standard has been so hard to get agreement on.

We must and should be clear. The Bill before the House is not the occupied territories Bill I tabled; it is a weaker measure which, sadly, does not meet our moral or legal obligations. Goods from the settlements should be banned - of course they should be - and were included in my original Bill for that reason. I also have a responsibility to be really honest here and state clearly that this Bill is not enough. About 70% of Ireland's external trade is in services and by exempting these flows from the Bill, the Government is implementing a trade ban that deliberately omits the vast majority of Irish trade. It is consciously letting large companies providing tech, IT and other service-based trade off the hook. That is an absolute tragedy.

If we are serious about opposing the settlements - an absolute minimum measure - then we should be doing it right. In fact, we should be doing so much more. Let me focus briefly on the law. In July 2024, the ICJ held that the occupation is illegal. The settlements built on Palestinian land are illegal. As a result, all countries, including Ireland, have a positive legal obligation to trade with them. The court made no distinction between trade and in physical goods like fruit and vegetables on the one hand and intangible services like tech and IT on the other. A euro of support is a euro of support. The ICJ was clear that it all should end.

This is not just my position, it is also the position of the Government. In June 2026, it stated that considering the ICJ advisory opinion in the wider context of international law, the only reasonable reading is that a complete prohibition on trade with Israeli settlements is required. On Committee Stage in the Dáil, the Minister said she accepts accepted that the obligation to ban trade includes goods and services and that a ban on both is needed in order to be fully compliant with the ICJ ruling. Therefore, the Bill instead only brings us towards compliance or into partial compliance with our obligations under international law. We need to reckon with the reality of what this means.

It is not just a case of making some progress and seeing what else we can do in the future. We are talking about firm, binding obligations under international law, something that Article 29 of the Constitution makes clear ought to be the guiding principle of our foreign policy. The Government is knowingly passing legislation that it accepts does not meet this standard. That means we will remain in breach of our obligations under international law by choice. The hope is that a full EU-wide ban on goods and services will be agreed in Brussels. I say with complete sincerity that I hope this will happen. I wish the Minister and her team every good luck with this important work, beginning with the EU Foreign Affairs Council on Monday. However, the inarguable reality accepted by the Government is that until such a ban is delivered, if it ever comes, we will choose not to comply with international law at a time when the rule of law globally is being eroded. This is a deeply worrying message to send.

The Government's arguments as to why it will not include services in the Bill have been well ventilated in the Dáil and at the foreign affairs committee. We will do our best to address them by way of amendment on Committee Stage. The reality is that they simply do not stack up. The world's leading legal experts have made it very clear that the same public policy exemption in EU law can be relied on to ban trade in services, just as it can for goods. Regardless of how the Government wants to frame or pitch it, the Spanish legislation, as others have said, restricts trade in services. There has been no pushback at EU level or no legal issue. US companies can continue to operate there. The sky has not fallen in; of course it has not.

The idea that services are too complicated to measure or track is undermined by the fact that we have done it already. As I have said many times, in 2014 we did this with Russian occupied territory, and rightly so. Ultimately, this is a political decision and a missed opportunity. Crucially, it is not the last one. As soon as the House resumes after the summer recess, I will table legislation to extend the ban to include services. We will keep going as long as we need to until our moral and legal obligations are met.

I want to close by sincerely thanking the incredible network of organisations and activists I have worked with over the past few years right across Ireland and, of course, in Palestine. They have forced the political system to lurch forward by sheer persistence. That is not an easy thing to do. So many people have put their heart and soul into this, and I could go on saying their names forever. My message to them today is that we will keep going until the right standard is met, no matter how long it takes.

I have said to the Minister already that none of us will be free until the Palestinian people are free. That is absolutely vital.

I really hope that today the Minister understands how frustrated I have been over the past eight years. I know she is committed to this issue, but we really need serious, tangible action.

The Minister is welcome to the House. At the outset, it is somewhat disappointing that it is seen that the Government has less conviction in terms of its beliefs and willingness to highlight the inaction and deep injustices being perpetrated by Israelis. That is certainly not the case. The anger and hurt that everybody in this House feels in regard to what is happening in the Middle East, Gaza and Palestine is just as vocal and strong on this side of the House. As a Government, we have led the way. As people have said, we have been singled out, by design, more so than any other European leaders, as being antisemitic. We have certainly been to the fore.

I will pick up on a couple of things. There was a point made that if we do not like the Attorney General's advice, we can get another legal opinion. We cannot have an á la carte Government. When you form a Government, you select an Attorney General and he or she is who you go to for legal advice. The Government does not always like the advice it gets but most times it has to abide by it. That is tried and tested and is part of our Constitution. That is why we have an Attorney General.

Many people have referenced what has happened in Spain and insist that Spain has a full ban on services. That is not quite true. What Spain has is very much a watered-down version. It has a prohibition on the advertising of services, which is a long way off a ban on the delivery of services. The Minister set out very clearly last week, when she met her European colleagues in County Cork, that we want to build on the basis of what we have here and that, ultimately, what we need is a pan-European approach. When you are dealing with Israel, it does not deal with things proportionally. We saw that with its reaction to the November attack. Certainly, the November attack was wrong, but absolutely nothing justifies what the Israelis did afterwards. The reality is, what Spain has done has not had a major impact and it has not forced the Zionist leaders to sit up and say they are going to change their actions and do things differently. There are only really two bodies of opinion which will influence the Israeli people, and those are America and Europe as a collective body. Ireland in isolation will not do this. Certainly, we have the courage and the conviction and we have stood up and led among our European peers and brought them to this point, as part of our European Presidency, and I am proud that the Minister will take the lead on this and I am confident, as she said last week, where this will be a key pillar and plank of our time in the European Presidency.

Nobody in Europe wants this to continue. Nobody on the Government side wants this to continue. Nobody on the Government side does not see how reprehensible Israel has been, how many war crimes it has perpetrated, and how we have to stop it. However, Ireland on its own is a very small island on the edge of Europe, and our action alone, as has been shown by Spain, is not going to make one jot of a difference. The only two bodies of opinion that Israel will ultimately take account of are America and Europe as a body.

Many people made reference to our actions in the aftermath of Russia's invasion of Ukraine. What happened was we immediately saw a European-wide response. The difference was Europe responded as a collective body, and that is what we need to see in terms of the occupied territories.

I commend Senator Black. She has done Trojan work, and I do not think there is anyone in Ireland who would not acknowledge that. To have brought this Bill this far is testimony to her conviction and great moral strength and courage. We as a Government are committed to an occupied territories Bill. Ultimately, an occupied territories Bill is only as strong as the institution that implements it, and that is why I say Ireland on its own is a very small block. We need all the major European leaders and countries to come together collectively with us to implement a ban that will force Israel to take significant action and stock of its actions. It will not change them, I am sure, but it will force them to take stock and there may be some moderate minds in the Israeli Government and community at large who will ultimately put their hands up and say Israel is now a pariah in the eyes of the world and they cannot allow this to continue.

At the outset, I welcome the Minister to the House and thank her for her leadership in this area and commitment in her opening remarks to go on pushing at European level to get a consensus on real action on the trade agreement and individual sanctions.

As someone who has had a consistent and special interest in this question over years, I applaud Senator Frances Black for her role and pioneering work in this area. That goes without saying. I come at this myself as a special rapporteur for Palestinian women and children for the Council of Europe, so I have more than a passing interest.

An important point that should be made is that we will differ about the content and elements of the Bill, but we should maintain a collective pride as a country in our strong stance as a nation on the Palestinian question. We recognise the State of Palestine. We have been consistent in our public criticism of the genocide in Gaza, we took a strong position at the UN, we were a co-sponsor of the ICJ, and latterly, we have given leadership at EU level. In the midst of our reasonable democratic discussion on, and disagreements about, this legislation, let us maintain that unity and pride in that leadership position as a country.

Today is about the occupied territories, but let me make a passing reference to the horror that is Gaza. It is a Second Stage speech. In excess of 73,000 people have been killed, while there have also been horrific injuries, malnutrition, starvation, displacement from homes and, effectively, no or very threatened schooling of children.

To turn to the issue of today, the illegal settlements, in international law they are clearly illegal and are expanding. They cause access to land resources for Palestinians to be restricted, there is settler violence, and Palestinian families continue to face displacement and growing insecurity. The nature of the settlements and their topography, or whatever the word is - their dispersed nature - is threatening the potential for a two-state solution. This Bill matters at its most basic level in that it sends a clear message that goods produced in the illegal settlements will not benefit from trade with Ireland, similar to apartheid South Africa in the past. More importantly, it shows leadership in Europe. As the Minister said, the Commission is coming up with proposals, and this exercise by us, and please God we will finish it before the summer, will make a difference in leading the European effort. We are winning support for suspension of trade. The number of countries which have come on side over recent months is, of course, because of the atrocities but also because of the Irish position. The difficulty presented here with services is their transnational nature, the intangible nature of the digital element, the cross-border element, and the Attorney General's advice that we cannot, as an individual State, take a unique position. That is the Government’s position on this. That is what presents the difficulty with the services.

The passing of the Bill in itself will be a leadership position for the Oireachtas to take. It will enhance our moral authority in Europe and give leadership to other European countries. It is, at its most fundamental level, coupled with our previous action on recognising Palestine, joining the ICJ case and strong public statements, another act of solidarity with the victims of these illegal settlements.

I welcome the Minister and acknowledge, as others have done, the central role Senator Black has played in bringing this issue before these Houses and the Irish people. It is sometimes forgotten what happened in 2018.

The only reason this House passed the occupied territories Bill was because the Fianna Fáil Party was, at that stage, party to a supply and confidence agreement with Fine Gael and did not feel itself obliged to support the Government's position on the Bill that was put before the House by Senator Frances Black and others at the time. Fianna Fáil supported her Bill at the time. Let us remember this. Without a peep out of them, they supported it. I want to say that not to recriminate with people here but to say that the Bill was passed by this House and then we had the advice of the Attorney General at the time to the effect that the Bill could not go any further in Dáil Éireann because it needed a money message from the Government and the Taoiseach. The suggestion was that because we might be open to some kind of EU sanction if we passed the legislation in both Houses, the Government was told that it was entitled to invoke the money message provision of the Constitution, and we had other objections thrown up too. Let us be clear about this: at the time there was a real public debate about whether there was or was not a valid reason to distinguish between goods and services. At the time, the great preponderance of legal opinion expressed was along the lines that the view taken by the Attorney General in respect of services was wrong. Let us be clear about that. As a former Attorney General, I know one thing: if you say there is a danger that something might happen, it is leapt on by some people in government to say, "The Attorney General has said we cannot do it". I want to make it very clear that if the Attorney General actually says, "This is manifestly illegal or unconstitutional", or whatever, that is one thing, but if we have some milk and watery opinion expressing views about the dangers and risks, that is a very different thing. It is a very different thing because it gives carte blanche to timid politicians or the like, or politicians who do not want to comply with the clear majority. Let us remember, going back to the supply and confidence period, that Fianna Fáil and the Opposition parties in the Dáil all could have passed that legislation were it not for the attitude taken by the Government. I just want to put all that on the record.

I also want to put on the record that those of us in this House who supported the Bill, people like Senator Black, myself, Ivana Bacik and David Norris, were immediately attacked as antisemites by the crooks and extremists who constitute a significant portion of the Israeli Government. This was an outrageous defamation of decent people who have always supported the right of Israel to exist within its recognised boundaries. We were accused of antisemitism to brand us with a kind of Nazi opposition to the Jewish people. This was done, and has been done consistently over the last number of years. America is one of the sources of that defamation of the people of Ireland. We have been told that we have an antisemitic streak in us. We do not. There is not any evidence of antisemitism in all of this. Any Government run by the corrupt President of the United States, Donald Trump, that appoints Mike Huckabee to be its ambassador in Jerusalem and encourages the extreme Zionists to be more and more unjust, murderous and expropriationary in relation to the Palestinian people should be ashamed of itself. I hear there are proposals that President Trump may come to Ireland. I do not care what he does in Doonbeg but if he puts his toe outside it I hope there is a massive demonstration by the Irish people to say we do not share his values; we want justice for the Palestinian people and we do not want his son-in-law Jared Kushner and his pals rebuilding the Gaza Strip as an American enclave on the Mediterranean. We do not want any further expansion of Israel in breach of international law and we want to make it very clear that threats of tariffs, threats of retaliation or threats of any kind do not wash with us. We have the right as a sovereign independent people to stand up for what is right.

Hear, hear.

I cannot stand here and congratulate the Government on finally catching up with the rest of the country. The Minister said that people think the Bill does not go far enough. It is not that people think the Bill does not go far enough; international law states that the Bill does not go far enough. The Government has been dragged into taking action by the public rather than showing real active and proactive leadership. I commend Senator Black on the Bill and I commend Mr. Conor O'Neill for all the work they have done on that. It was passed in 2019 and, seven years later, we are looking at this watered-down version that is a husk of the original legislation.

At the same time as the Government has been slow-walking the occupied territories Bill, we have watched a genocide being live-streamed to our mobile phones. We have seen over 73,000 Palestinian men, women and children slaughtered. Of them, 20,000 were children. More than 1,000 people have been slaughtered since the pretend ceasefire. We read the independent report on the violence committed specifically against children by the Israel Defense Forces, IDF, including the horrifying story of a ten-day old baby shot in the head while being held in its mother's arms, breast-feeding. I do not claim any monopoly on empathy. We often hear from Government members that they think the Opposition feels it has some sort of monopoly on empathy. I do not think that but, in the face of all the horror and in the face of endless impunity for the Israeli State, I cannot fathom why the Government is choosing the weakest form of this legislation. I really think it is shameful. What message does it send to Palestinians? "We have seen the oppression and slaughter of your people, the genocide you have experienced and the violent attacks on your land. We are very sorry but we are actually not willing to meet our own obligations under international law." Let us be clear: the Bill here today with the exclusion of services will not bring us into compliance with our own obligations. It is only partially compliant with the ICJ opinion.

Yesterday in the Dáil the Minister of State, Deputy Richmond, mentioned that this Bill is not in breach of international law. I think he mentioned that we fulfil those obligations according to the EU. I reject that. The Department and the Minister, Deputy McEntee, have said that we are not complying with international law. The Department and the Minister, Deputy McEntee, have brazenly admitted that we do not comply. In fact, in the Minister's contributions today she talked about contributing to Ireland's efforts to uphold and comply with international law. It is just not the case. EU legal experts in the committee said that the EU courts have said that the law must be read in a way that allows member states like Ireland to meet our international obligations. That is the EU court's ruling when it comes to international law. EU public policy exemption extends to all trade. There is no distinction in international law around goods and services. That is an arbitrary distinction the Government is presenting us with. We heard from Professor Panos Koutrakos and Professor Takis Tridimas that public policy provides a derogation not only from the free movement of goods but also the freedom to provide services. There is no basis and no distinction in international law. I do not know why we are tying ourselves in knots or why the Government is tying itself in knots trying to make this distinction.

I find it astonishing that we are having this conversation and having to fight for services to be included. There is a genocide taking place and we are having these arbitrary discussions around types of trade while we are knowingly pursuing legislation that will not bring us into compliance with international law. It is even in the Long Title of the Bill, which refers to it being an Act to provide compliance by the State with international legal obligations, but we are not doing that. I do not really believe Ireland can keep talking about being a defender of international law and a champion of international law when this Bill does not meet our most basic obligations and our most minimum standards.

I would like to know if the Government has considered the breach to our own Constitution that this watered-down Bill might represent, specifically Article 29.3 which commits Ireland to respecting international law as its rule of conduct in its relations with other states. With that in mind, we have the Minister on record saying that this Bill only brings us into partial compliance. I find that absolutely incredible.

I refer to the risk into which that places us by acknowledging that we are passing legislation that does not meet our obligations. That is happening when international laws are under threat from all sides. We talk about international law losing its credibility or being weakened. International law is stuff that is written down. It is standards. International law, in and of itself, is not failing. Leaders are failing to uphold it and we will be participating in the degradation of international law with this legislation.

We are setting a ceiling. We are not being ambitious or trying to create a new brilliant norm that other countries will follow. What I am deeply worried about is that we are effectively signalling to the EU Commission that when, as I imagine it will, presents proposals down the line for an EU-wide ban on trade with the occupied territory in Palestine, we are basically saying that we are fine if we just go with goods. That is what we are saying. We are saying that we are okay with that. We are signalling a low bar rather than the high bar that we could be setting.

I want to mention Spain. It has come up in other contexts. Hundreds and hundreds of advertisements have been taken down since December, not just a handful, it is hundreds. We have that evidence and we can talk about it at Committee Stage next week.

Hand on heart, do we believe this Bill is doing everything in our power to stop the continuation of the Israeli illegal settlements in occupied Palestine? Can we really say that hand on heart when 70% of the trade is with services? Gaza is rubble. The Palestinian people are being displaced by the hundreds of thousands. Their land is being violently taken by the Israeli-sanctioned violent settler regime and we are giving a pittance with this legislation.

Yes, EU collective action would be fabulous. Over 70,000 people are dead and we have not succeeded in EU collective action. Let us set a high bar and include services. There is still time for us to stop this in its tracks and produce good legislation that we can all be proud of and other countries will copy, not the lowest standard possible.

I must disagree with one of my colleagues from the foreign affairs committee, who I acknowledge backed the unanimous report that we put forward, in respect of the suggestion that the Attorney General's advice trumps any other legal opinion, because it does not. The Attorney General's advice does not trump an opinion of the International Court of Justice, and even Trump does not trump an International Court of Justice opinion. The International Court of Justice is clear on this and by the way, while we do not know what advice the Attorney General has given the Government, we know what the Attorney General said in public previously. The Attorney General was pretty clear on Ireland's view of the obligations and I note these were the obligations that existed prior to the International Court of Justice's opinion. When we - Senator Black, I and others - first brought this Bill, we were clear on international law then. It is has not changed. What changed was the Attorney General's opinion and it moved into alignment with ours. The Attorney General stated:

In Ireland’s view, these obligations require all states ... to review their trading relationships ... and to take steps to prevent trade that assists in the maintenance of the situation created by the settlement activity ...

That is what the Attorney General said and that was just on trade. When the opinion came out, the Minister, Deputy McEntee, clearly stated that the only interpretation of it is that it relates to all trade and we have a Bill that the Government claims that it wants it to provide for compliance with the international obligations that were already there but that were made explicit in that opinion.

We have seen, however, a dilution where we have gone from a Bill to provide for compliance to something that might contribute positively to Ireland's efforts to comply. The Minister acknowledged on Committee Stage in the Dáil that this is something that would only achieve partial compliance.

There is a constitutional question here. If the Government is doing something and it says that this is what is required to comply and if the Attorney General says it in front of the International Court of Justice but then it goes ahead to only partially comply, there is a problem there.

I am going to come back to the two-pronged approach in a second but I want to briefly point to the reasons that are given here, which include being legally defensible, practically enforceable and mindful of Ireland's wider economic interests.

On the issue of legal defensibility, because we were so confident with the crystal-clear legal advice that we got, the committee saw a legal challenge as an opportunity to set a precedent at the EU level and force the European Union to act, because it is not just about persuasion. If we get a ruling from the European Court of Justice, which the committee believed and all of the experts who went on the record believed, it will oblige EU action. We would not just have to try to persuade it and bring it slowly, it would oblige it.

There was also concern expressed at the committee about the danger of bad precedent. Blinne Ní Ghrálaigh spoke about the significance of the good precedent of Ireland passing legislation that is squarely in compliance with its obligations and about the flip side if Ireland passed selective or restrictive legislation that did not fully comply with its obligations. She said it could have a negative impact and could be used by other states to say "this much, but no more". The legally defensible piece is clear. The practically enforceable piece is something that we are doing already on Russia. It can be done. Spain is doing it, and it is recognised as a measure having equivalent effect. The principle is there and it can be done.

That leaves us with Ireland's wider economic and employment interests. Is this to do with money? Are we going to say that economic interests trump the dead children that everybody talks about how they care about them? Does it trump the stolen land and robbed ground? That is not acceptable to the Irish public, and it does not give the public what it deserves.

Colonialism is never acceptable and that is why our original Bill also referred to every occupied territory, including Western Sahara and Western Papua, because the fact that money can be made out of it is never a justification for the trashing of human rights and the making of pieces. It is not a justification now, and it is not one that will wash with the public. We will have an opportunity to improve it.

I have a final question. If the Government's dual-pronged approach does not deliver a ban on services from Europe during the six months of the Presidency, will it come back and bring it through the Legislature? If Gaza and Lebanon become the subject of settlement, will it also bring them in? Those are the questions that I will be asking and looking for hard answers on at Committee Stage.

The Minister of State is welcome, and I am glad that the Minister is still here.

The Senator should note the Minister who is in possession of the debate is sitting there.

Sure. I simply wished to congratulate the Minister on the statements that she has made and the leadership she has given in our explicit condemnations of Israel's actions.

To be clear, the Israel Defense Forces is a multi-confessional organisation. It has Jewish, Druze, Sunni Muslim, Christian and Shia Muslim members. It is a multi-confessional force, so to criticise its illegal actions and its acts of genocide is not a statement of antisemitism, as Senator McDowell said. The charges that have been made against members of the Government and Opposition that they are antisemitic are, in and of themselves, racially motivated. It is Hibernophobic because the extreme elements in the Israeli Government resent the fact that we call them out on their illegal actions.

Approximately 16,000 civilians have been killed in Putin's criminal and appalling invasion of Ukraine and the Irish Government has done everything in its power to sanction Russian in that regard. We have been involved in countless rounds of sanctions against Russian goods and services. We have supplied Ukraine with all sorts of supports, including military equipment. We gave away all of our air defence weapons and this is quite right.

We should do this but we should also act with the same alacrity and urgency when it comes to our Palestinian brothers and sisters of whom 75,000 have been murdered by the Israel Defense Forces. In the occupied territories it is a figure of about 1,000 since the genocidal attack on Israel by Hamas of 7 October. I want to be really clear; I condemn Hamas. They are an absolutely reprehensible and odious organisation, as are Hezbollah, who have murdered Irish soldiers, including a peacekeeper not long ago. They are war crimes but we have to be very careful.

I was in Senator McDowell's office recently and he has a framed black and white photograph of a young boy with his hands up, surrounded by German soldiers. I asked him, "Why do you have that picture there, Michael?" - I do call him Michael in an informal setting - and he replied that is why we are here. It is that simple. We are here to prevent this type of genocide and it is happening now on our watch, as public representatives. The shooting of children, selectively, in the abdomen one day, in their genitalia the next day, in their heads a day after, is being documented. This is a premeditated, methodical act of terrorism against the Palestinian people. It is genocide in tooth and nail.

In order for the Israelis to carry out the level of slaughter they have, they have been mobilising artificial intelligence. We now know they have a number of targeting algorithms, including Lavender and Habsora or The Gospel - one of them is called Daddy's Home - where from all of the data they scrape from the Internet and compute, the intersectional points are often when a target, which is randomly assigned not by a human but by an artificial intelligence search engine, is at home with his or her family. That is a place he or she will return to and that is why so many civilians have been butchered. That is why, as one of my colleagues set out, an entire family were killed in the occupied territories, because they know the family are all together as one unit and it is a deliberate tactic to kill. They call it "mowing the grass". It is disgusting and obscene.

I want to be really clear about this; it is not technology that permits this - it is computing power. That is why services are so important. The Israelis cannot have access to the computing power of our data centres because that is what they do. You do not need physical proximity to a data centre to harness its computing power. We know they have harnessed some of the computing power for programmes for something like Uber to enhance their targeting acquisition and their logistics. It is really important that we should have included services in this Bill, but as Senator Black said we will return to this and will push for it. We had an opportunity here, given our Presidency of the European Union, to create the consensus Senator Ahearn talked about, when all of Europe would come together. This is a missed opportunity to do that. I thank Senator Black for all the work she has done in this regard.

I thank all the Senators who have spoken and contributed to this debate, which I was following in between votes in Dáil Éireann, when I was not present myself. Like others, I acknowledge Senator Black on her lifetime of work on this issue, particularly since we were in the Senate, together with An Cathaoirleach and Senator Higgins when we first debated the original iteration of this Bill. The question for this Government at this juncture is, what can we do and how can we act at this time to make a difference in light of our policy goals and the clear, craven situation on the ground? I remind Senators it has been two years exactly since Ireland's announcement that we would recognise the State of Palestine, together with Spain and Norway, followed closely by Slovenia. That decision was taken against the backdrop of the intolerable humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza, the shrinking space for Palestinian life in the West Bank, and the need to inject fresh impetus towards a just and lasting peace. In doing so we also sought to show leadership at a time when many of our partners did not think it would be of any consequence. That decision had a real effect, as many of our EU partners and closest friends and neighbours outside the EU soon followed Ireland in the intervening period in recognising the State of Palestine.

This Government is committed to taking concrete actions that will have a real impact. We are prepared to act and we have a track record of doing so when other international partners have been unable or unwilling. In taking forward this Bill, this is exactly what we are doing. This Bill is without a doubt very significant legislation. We will be the only parliament in the European Union to pass legislation of this kind. It will contribute positively to Ireland's efforts to uphold and comply with international law, including the findings of the 2024 advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice. It will also contribute positively to Irish and international efforts to prevent unilateral actions that impinge upon the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and upon the viability of the two-state solution.

I remind Senators of what the Government committed to in the programme for Government. We committed to progressing legislation to prohibit the import of goods from, or originating in, Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestine territory. That is exactly what this Bill will do. On the issue of services, it is worth repeating that the Government has a responsibility to ensure any legislation is legally robust, capable of being implemented and able to withstand challenge. This would not be the case in respect of services. We must, I am afraid, take into account the legal, operational and other risks that come in this regard.

I also note that national legislation being taken forward by other EU member states is focused, primarily, on prohibiting goods from Israeli settlements in the same way our legislation has this focus. I do not want to get into a full back and forth on the issues raised because I am aware there will be a lengthy and detailed Committee Stage debate with the Minister, Deputy McEntee, next week and a lot of the issues were aired last night on Report Stage in Dáil Éireann and last week on Committee Stage. However, it is important we do not always speak in absolutes. Asserting confidently that something is definitely happening has been unhelpful when we are trying to have a clear debate on this issues. Let us not forget Norway is not a member of the European Union and is not bound by the same rules. Let us not forget how the Spanish Government introduced an amendment to the consumer protection Act by royal decree. Let us not forget the Netherlands are merely in a consultation period and Belgium is in a similar place. Regrettably, the Government in Slovenia that was progressing very similar legislation, is no longer in office. I remember having a conversation with the then Slovenian foreign minister when she literally asked, "How do we follow the legislation that is being progressed in Ireland?" Unfortunately, she is no longer in office.

Equally, the Government does not have the luxury of putting forward proposals without fully working through all of the potential consequences. We have taken the time to carefully consider all of the options as well as the proposals that have been made as part of the debate and during the pre-legislative scrutiny process. The Government must take account of broader realities including the debates that are happening at EU level. Ireland, objectively, has led from the front in this issue. We were the first EU country to announce our intention to prohibit the importation of settlement goods; others have followed our lead. The number of states considering these measures continues to grow and this has meaning at the European level. Momentum is building daily as a result of actions taken by countries like Ireland. While we move ahead on prohibiting settlement trade at national level, our preference, as stated clearly on many previous occasions is that collective action be taken at EU level. This will have a real impact. Just as we have sought to show leadership on the issue of trade with settlements and on the recognition of Palestine in May 2024, we will continue to lead on the need for effective EU action. Ireland has consistently argued for the European Commission to bring forward a proposal to prohibit EU trade with Israeli settlements on the basis of the EU's common commercial policy for a decision at the Foreign Affairs Council in order to comply with international law.

This two-pronged approach, namely, legislation at national level on goods and a consistent push at European level for an EU-wide ban on trade with settlements, is making progress. The Commission has now committed to bringing forward proposals at the Foreign Affairs Council of 13 July, including on trade with settlements. Do we wish EU proposals have been brought forward sooner? Of course. It has not been easy to get to this stage but let us be clear; this was not on the horizon just a few months ago. This is the result of hard work and the consistent arguments of countries such as Ireland, not just the Government and not just officials but the entire body politic and civil society at large. Our cause also goes far beyond the issue of settlements. Ireland has repeatedly pushed for the suspension of the EU-Israel Association Agreement or at a minimum, the suspension of the trade elements of the agreement as previously proposed by the President of the European Commission. It was not that long ago that when Ireland and Spain brought forward the proposal to open up the EU-Israel Association Agreement, only three member states backed that call. In May of last year that had risen to 19 of the 27 member states. This is real, hard work being put in to bring together collective EU action. We can all voice our very real frustration, anger and complete bafflement by the decisions taken by the leaders of other EU member states on this issue. That unfortunately is the situation of being part of the European Union.

We have to work within the confines of EU law and be aware of arrangements at European Council level. It should not, at some stage, deflect from the real work going on by repeated Irish Ministers to make progress, particularly in concert with our friends in Spain and, increasingly, countries such as the Netherlands, Belgium and Luxembourg. The appalling and worsening humanitarian situation in Gaza demands a very real and serious response, as does the situation in the West Bank where there is a massive expansion of Israeli settlements, alongside rampant and escalating settler violence. This is part of an established pattern on the part of the Israeli Government to create a new status quo in the occupied Palestinian territory. Ireland will continue to stand up for human rights and international law within the EU and seek accountability for Israel’s egregious breaches of international law.

The Minister, Deputy McEntee, spoke earlier about the motivation behind the Bill, which addresses our obligations under international law and what we hope to achieve by enacting it. This Bill is only one element of Ireland’s comprehensive approach to the Israel-Palestine conflict. It is particularly in response to Israel’s creeping annexation of the West Bank. Our overarching approach, however, encompasses our commitment to work with key partners to end the conflict in Gaza, advance a sustainable peace plan and address the huge challenges facing Palestinians in Gaza. It encompasses our commitment to supporting a Palestinian State consisting of Gaza and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, as well as achieving a just and lasting peace where Israelis and Palestinians live side by side in two states - Israel and Palestine - in peace, security and dignity within the agreed 1967 borders.

Ireland has always been clear that our goal is for both Israelis and Palestinians to live in peace and security. The cycle of violence that has brought suffering to both Palestinians and Israelis needs to be brought to an end. We must be careful to remember that and leave space for the people-to-people contacts that have always been the most valuable part of the relationship between Ireland and Israel. Our history on this island means that we understand the politics of division, which never advances a peaceful outcome.

The actions of the Israeli Government are explicitly designed to bury the idea of a two-state solution. We simply cannot allow that to happen. Ireland will continue to uphold the right of the Palestinian people to a state consisting of Gaza and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, as well as the right of Palestinians to self-determination. Ireland’s position on the Middle East is firmly rooted in respect for human rights and international law in both words and deeds. The Government’s record will attest to that, including by enacting this Bill. I thank Senators for their contribution and I commend the Bill to the House.

When is it proposed to take Committee Stage?

Next Tuesday.

Is that agreed? Agreed.