Helen McEntee
Meath East · Fine Gael · Ireland
“There are no new missions, so there is only so much we can partake in. In regard to UN requests over the past ten years, in September 2019, we had 14 Defence Forces personnel deployed to a UN mission in Mali as part of a joint operation with the German armed forces.”
“I thank the Deputy for his continued engagement on this matter. It is appreciated and I reaffirm our shared commitment to truth and justice, not least for Private Rooney, but in particular for his family.”
“I thank the Deputy for raising the matter. I know he is committed to this issue; I am too. I have in recent months spent some time travelling to different barracks and Army bases and meeting with personnel. What I see all over the country is their professionalism, dedication and commitment.”
“I disagree that people are being pushed into the courts. The situation is exactly the opposite. I have said in the Chamber many times since I started taking these questions that the State Claims Agency is there and wants to mediate and work directly with people in order that cases do not go directly to the courts.”
“We are all committed to strengthening recruitment to and supporting retention in the Permanent Defence Force. The military authorities have advised that the strength of the Permanent Defence Force stood at 7,823 personnel on 31 May, the most recent date for which we have a figure available.”
“It is the case that no mission is the same, so it is also a matter for the Defence Forces to assess and scope out the mission and then to decide whether it is a mission we can partake in. A question keeps being asked about what it is we would not be able to be a part of if we were to keep the triple lock.”
The complete record
Every one of 2,132 lines we hold for Helen McEntee, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 4 of 43.
“In terms of our overall security and sending a very clear message to Russia that we fully support Ukraine and that it is part of our community, this is an important step in the process as well.”
“We do have to work in consensus, and with all other countries to address concerns they may have, while at the same time supporting progress on the ground. Just because clusters have not opened, it does not mean the governments of Ukraine and Moldova cannot continue to make the reforms, whether in rule of law, civil areas and other areas, that need to happen, so that they are as ready as they can be. We will work to open as many of the clusters as we can, if not all of them, during our Presidency, and we will do that through consensus, working with all 26 member states and working closely with Moldova and Ukraine. In terms of what this means for them, it is absolutely essential.”
“I am very conscious of the issue the Deputy has raised. Unfortunately, when we look at any of the countries on their path towards accession, nothing is straightforward for any country. Unfortunately, there are issues with individual member states and issues among those accession countries as well that still need to be resolved. That is why it takes as long as it does for a lot of countries. When I was in this role in European affairs ten years ago we were talking about Montenegro, Albania and other countries nearly being there. Now, ten years on, we hope to get Montenegro over the line later this year. We are working on the accession treaty. We hold the pen now for the next six months. We hope to close as many chapters as we can with Albania. Obviously, with Moldova and Ukraine we want to make as much progress as possible.”
“That blockage has been removed and, thanks to the new Government under Péter Magyar, we have had the opening of the first round of clusters. Unfortunately, a potential blockage or issue has now emerged in regard to the opening of the remaining clusters. We are ambitious to open all five during our Presidency. That might not be straightforward but it just needs engagement and political dialogue. We need to work closely with all 26 member states to make sure issues of concern can be addressed and that we work towards opening all the remaining clusters. I would, of course, like to see both countries moving together. They started this process together and they have worked together on getting to where they are now. We want to work closely with both of them in order to open the remaining clusters.”
“As I was saying, great efforts have been made by both countries, particularly by Ukraine in what are unimaginable conditions, to make the changes they are making. That is why we want to support them in the best way we can. It is why, when I was in Ukraine earlier this year, I met with civil society groups that are playing a key role in advocating for and bringing forward those changes as quickly as possible. The Deputy rightly pointed out some of the challenges we will face. For some time, under the Government of Viktor Orbán, we had significant challenges in reaching consensus to move forward on a number of supports for Ukraine, not least the €90 billion loan that was previously agreed by the Council leaders.”
“The Commission has confirmed that both countries are technically ready to open all the negotiating clusters. It was very welcome that the first clusters opened for both Ukraine and Moldova two weeks ago. I acknowledge our colleagues in Cyprus and the work they have done to ensure that progress was made. From my visit to Ukraine earlier this year and from meeting representatives of Moldova, I am conscious of the very serious efforts both countries have been making to meet the challenge of aligning their laws with the EU acquis under unprecedented circumstances.”
“We discussed a number of things but particularly Ukraine's accession and how we can work towards that over the next six months. Enlargement is a priority for us during our Presidency. We all know the benefits Ireland has experienced from membership. It is important that we support through the accession process other countries that want to join the European community and the EU. Moldova and Ukraine are two of the current candidate countries. They both applied for membership in 2022 and opened accession negotiations in 2024. Last year's European Commission annual enlargement report indicated that Moldova made the most one-year progress of all candidates during the reporting period. The same report described Ukraine's progress as remarkable.”
“I acknowledge the colleagues who attended the opening ceremony yesterday. I hope President Zelenskyy's presence has shown not just our own citizens but the rest of Europe and the world that we fully support Ukraine and intend, through our Presidency, to do everything we can to continue that support and to put pressure on Russia. That includes supporting Ukraine on its accession path. I believe, as I think we all believe, that it is the only trajectory for Ukraine. The country is already defending every single one of us in its defence of itself. In so many ways, Ukraine is already part of our European community. It is about making sure we do everything we can to support the process for enlargement. We had that discussion at our bilateral meeting with President Zelenskyy.”
“As we know, he has direct engagement with his legal team on this matter and a trial is due to start soon. I will monitor the situation and engage directly with my officials on it as things progress.”
“I stress again that it is not appropriate for me as Minister to suggest or dictate where somebody should be detained. I appreciate that people have a view on the prison this individual is in and the conditions under which he is being kept. It is the same situation for all prisoners in that particular prison. It is not for me or anybody here to dictate or decide whether somebody is appropriately placed or otherwise, and nor is it appropriate to comment on the type of legislation under which the person is being charged. If there is a sense or a view that the trial is not being conducted appropriately, we will respond accordingly. My officials, whom I have asked to engage directly with me on this, are keeping a very close eye on the situation. We are engaging directly with Daniel and his family.”
“In terms of legal representation, any issues that may be raised directly relating to the trial are a matter for the legal team to raise. That is what is happening and there is a legal team working to support Daniel. I am keeping a close eye on the situation and have asked my officials to engage regularly with me on it as the trial, which is only starting, proceeds. We will continue to keep in regular contact with the legal team.”
“I am told he has access to a gym, prison library and reading materials, as well as there being televisions in prisoners' rooms. I appreciate that this is not an ideal scenario for anybody, but he is in a prison and the conditions are strict and apply to everybody. I am very clear that we are keeping a very clear focus on the trial and engage regularly with the family. Our consular teams have also regularly engaged with Mr. Tatlow-Devally to make sure that the conditions he has been kept in our, insofar as is possible, are appropriate. Obviously, when someone is in prison, there will be strict conditions applying, but we want to ensure he is being treated in the most humane and fairest way possible. That engagement will continue.”
“Deputy Ó Laoghaire will appreciate that it is not appropriate for me to comment on the type of legislation or charges that are being taken in another member state. We expect that any other European country would follow fair procedures and rules. That has to be a given and is exactly what I have raised directly with my colleague. Concerns have been raised with us. In terms of the response, my colleague, the Minister, has said he would engage and relay our concerns or raise the fact that we had raised this particular issue. I appreciate that the conditions in the prison are strict. The rules apply to all prisoners, not just the individual whom Deputies have mentioned or those who were arrested with him. They are all confined to their cells for 23 hours a day.”
“Two hearings have taken place this week and further hearings are scheduled for tomorrow, 3 July. There will be subsequent hearings on 22, 24, 27 and 29 July. There are further dates out to January 2027. My officials will of course continue to follow developments very closely. I have asked that they continue to keep me updated while ensuring that regular engagement continues with Mr. Tatlow-Devally and his family, whom I appreciate are under huge stress.”
“My Department will continue to provide all appropriate consular assistance to Mr. Tatlow-Devally and his family. As I previously outlined, the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations defines the parameters of consular assistance in international law, which is, in turn, reflected in my Department and our consular assistance charter. The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade and its embassies and consulates are precluded from intervening in the judicial and legal process of another country. However, when a citizen is on trial abroad, their rights and interests have to be represented, including by their defence lawyers, as I know is the case in this instance. A number of trial dates have been set for the coming weeks. The last time we spoke about this in the House, dates had not been set and there was concern about that.”
“I am not aware that he has been denied phone calls with his family. My last understanding was that there had been regular engagement and opportunity for engagement. Officials in the consular directorate of my Department and Munich are working to facilitate a visit to Mr. Tatlow-Devally by a number of Deputies. We have been advocating for and supporting him in whatever way we can in respect of engagement not just with the family, but also with others who wish to visit. We are liaising with the relevant German authorities with a view to obtaining the necessary visit permissions and will engage directly with Deputies in that regard. The decision as to whether to permit visits is one for the German authorities. It has been made clear to us that this is something that should be possible. We hope this would be followed through on.”
“A dedicated consular officer in the Consulate General in Munich has been assigned to provide consular assistance and support Mr. Tatlow-Devally and his family. Staff in the consulate, including the consul general and deputy consul general, have undertaken six consular visits to him in prison. The most recent visit was earlier this week on Tuesday, 30 June. These visits are an important opportunity to assess the conditions of the detention. I fully appreciate that the prison has a 23-hour lock-up. It is the same for all prisoners in the prison. At the same time, that is a substantial amount of time. The visits provide an opportunity for Mr. Tatlow-Devally when meeting with our team to raise any concerns about his treatment with us. In turn, we have kept his family informed about these visits and remain in direct contact with them.”
“I propose to take Questions Nos. 10 and 11 together. This matter has been raised on a number of occasions by the Deputy and other colleagues. At the outset, I assure the Deputies that my colleagues across our consular teams and I are closely following the case and engaging with Mr. Tatlow-Devally and his family on a regular basis. My Department, in particular our Consulate General in Munich, supported by our embassy in Berlin and the consular directorate in Dublin, has been providing consular assistance since September 2025 when we were first notified of the case. Furthermore, I have raised this issue directly with the State Secretary at the Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy, Dr. Thomas Steffen, when I met him in May.”
“It is not for me as Minister to tell a team that it should not play or what it should do. That has to be a decision taken by the sporting body and players in the organisation.”
“Of course we oppose genocide and what is happening on the ground. I do not think we can be any clearer about what is happening. We have joined the South African case. There is a court process and international legal process when it comes to recognising genocide. We have joined that because we believe that is clearly the right thing to do. One only has to look at the UN report on children, which was very clear that children were being targeted. We want to ensure that the actions of the Israeli Government are changed and we do everything we can in that regard. I have made my view on the position taken by the FAI very clear. There is no consensus at European level that would ban or stop Israel from competing in these games. It is then a decision as to whether our teams would pull out.”
“Ireland has led. The Deputy might not agree with me, he might not believe that, but Ireland has led and we are leading. I would say that the FAI is leading in that regard as well. It has made its position very clear, and I support the position that it has taken. I support the views that it has, but that is the position it has taken. It is not the position that UEFA as a whole has taken. It is not for the Irish Government to decide what matches happen, where they happen or whether they are cancelled or otherwise. That is a decision taken by the governing bodies. My colleague, the Minister for sport, will continue to engage with those bodies and organisations. Our objective as a Government is to make sure that the action we take at Government, Council and European levels has the effect we all want. Of course we oppose genocide.”
“Even with the discussions on the ceasefire in Lebanon, there is clearly still activity happening on the ground, where citizens are not able to return home. I believe that things are changing and that the view of many countries, including the US, as we have heard, is shifting. However, we cannot as a Government tell UEFA or the other sporting organisations what they should be doing. I fully respect and take into account the position of our own sporting organisations and the view that they have expressed. I fully support their actions.”
“I know that other countries, such as Russia and Belarus, have been excluded from international sporting events, but this is because there was a consensus among the international sporting bodies. I believe it is for the organisations, working with their parent bodies and the international organisations, to raise concerns and to be able to discuss this and vote on it. What is very clear, though, is that there is no consensus. I believe views and positions are changing, given what we see from the Israeli Government with the introduction of the death penalty, which is very clearly targeting Palestinians; the worsening humanitarian situation; and the continuing escalation of settler violence.”
“The Deputy is right in that sense, but “above us” is talking about UEFA. I fully accept that the FAI has pressed for the exclusion of Israel from UEFA, and it is its right to do so. However, there is a lack of consensus among UEFA members beyond that and, indeed, among international sporting bodies more generally in relation to the exclusion of Israel from international sporting competitions. Similar to the Council, where there is a very clear view from a number of member states, including Ireland, that we need to take stronger action and go as far as suspending the EU-Israel Association Agreement, there are other member states that do not agree with that. For that reason, we have not been able to reach a consensus.”
“Our voice has been consistent in our calls for appropriate actions in response to Israeli breaches of human rights and democratic principles, and we are trying to use all the tools at our disposal - political, legal and diplomatic - to advocate for peace, accountability and an end to the Israeli Government’s devastating policies in Gaza and the West Bank. In addition to supporting an EU-wide prohibition on trade, our long-standing position is that the EU-Israel Association Agreement should be suspended or, at a minimum, that the trade elements should be suspended. A number of member states have called for stronger collective EU action. I welcome the commitment by the Commission to bring forward a list of options for consideration at the July Foreign Affairs Council, which will take place on 13 July.”
“Of course, we continue to have significant concerns about the worsening humanitarian situation in Gaza, with intolerable conditions that are only getting worse. Israel must immediately remove restrictions on aid access and facilitate essential supplies and services to reach people across the Gaza Strip. More broadly, it must completely cease the actions it is taking in the West Bank and Lebanon. We are deeply concerned by the sharply deteriorating situation in the West Bank, in particular the massive expansion of settlements and the rampant and escalating settler violence, which continues in an atmosphere of impunity.”
“I thank the Deputy for raising this issue, which follows on from the discussion I have just had with Deputies O’Gorman and Ó Murchú. National governing bodies, NGBs, of sport and international sporting federations, including the FAI, are independent, autonomous bodies responsible for the governance of their own sports, including the organisation of sporting fixtures. The Government and Sport Ireland have no role in determining or supporting the organisation of such fixtures, and I have not had meetings to discuss Israel-Ireland soccer matches. We respect the decision made by the FAI and will continue to work closely with it, through the Minister for sport, and engage with it on any matters of concern.”
“It is my ambition that we will be prioritising this during our Presidency, and I have spoken extensively to Kaja Kallas, the High Representative, about it. At every single Foreign Affairs Council, this will be on the agenda. We want to make sure that progress is made during our term and that we take stronger action. I cannot say this enough. I do not believe the EU has been strong enough on this. I do not believe that we have taken strong enough action. I believe that while we all agree that the only peaceful resolution for Israelis and Palestinians, and for the wider region, is the prospect of a two-state solution, that is becoming less and less likely the more we allow the Israeli Government to introduce illegal settlements into the occupied territories. I am advocating for this.”
“The EU legal services have been very clear that this is possible and that we could vote to suspend trade in the occupied territories. Following that discussion, I, along with at least 17 member states, if not more, asked the Commission to bring further proposals beyond the one that was currently on the table, which we know does not have a consensus. That includes the banning of trade in the occupied territories. The Commission gave a clear commitment that it would put forward proposals before the next Council meeting, which is on 13 July and is the first meeting that we will chair as President. I expect that we will get those proposals before then. There is no point in us getting them at the meeting when we have not had a chance to look at them, examine them and debate them ourselves, even within my Department and within the Government.”
“This would be far more significant than anything we, on an individual basis, would be able to do to impact and change the Israeli Government's actions. It would impact billions of euro worth of trade, and this is something that I advocated for. What is also not on the table is a banning of goods within the occupied territories. I have been advocating, as other colleagues have, for this particular proposal to be put on the table for member states to vote on. This is a vote that could be put forward at the Trade Council because it is a trade matter. At our last Foreign Affairs Council meeting, the EU legal services gave us a clear legal direction that this was possible. There had been suggestions that we could not vote on this in terms of trade because of different reasons.”
“I want to outline where we are at the moment. The Commission already has a proposal on the table that would suspend the EU-Israel Association Agreement. That was put on the table last year, but it has never been voted on. This is a vote that would require unanimity within the Foreign Affairs Council and, being honest, I do not believe there is that unanimity. There are a number of member states that have clearly said that they will not vote for this. That does not stop me or Ireland continuing to advocate for a vote on this or for member states to vote to suspend the association agreement. We have also advocated for the trade element of the association agreement to be suspended at the very least.”
“We are bringing forward our legislation, which sets out a clear message that we do not agree with and are completely opposed to the Israeli Government and its actions, that we are working to comply with the ICJ ruling, and that we fully comply with it by making sure that Europe responds in whole.”
“In terms of the legal basis, the 2024 ruling had not taken place at the time. Since then, it has given ground to the public policy argument when it comes to goods. Deputies can say that they do not believe that, but if it were the case that the US was the only reason that we were not doing this, then we would not be bringing forward legislation, full stop, because the US has been very clear that it does not support any legislation. That is not what I am doing here and not what the Government has agreed to do. We are taking a twin-track approach to this.”
“I regularly engage with my colleague from the Netherlands. My colleague from Belgium is bringing forward legislation and we know that Spain has. Slovenia was on that path, but with a new Government, it is unfortunately now moving in the opposite direction. Norway is also bringing forward legislation. All of this, and the response from the Commission, is having an effect. While not bringing forward legislation, other members states are asking me about what we are doing and engaging with us on what we are doing and bringing forward. It is building momentum, and that is the objective here. When we were recognising the State of Palestine, we said that we wanted to do it with other member states because it would have a greater impact. The same approach is being applied here and that is why we have taken this decision now.”
“I disagree with Deputy O'Gorman when he says that it is not effective because over the last number of months, I have seen a number of member states advocating for a stronger response. Last year, when there had not been any kind of a ceasefire, more member states had started to change their positions, and that is why we had the suspension of the association agreement put on the table by the Commission as a possible option for member states to vote on. At that stage, a ceasefire was agreed, but we all agree that the ceasefire is somewhat in name only. While it has provided some relief, there are still people being killed every day and the humanitarian catastrophe has continued to worsen. The effect it is having is that a number of other member states are now bringing forward legislation.”
“I feel as strongly as they and other Deputies do about this matter, having visited the region and spoken to so many people and families on the Israel-Gaza border - I was not able to get into Gaza when I visited - who were on the outside and who wanted to get back in to see family and friends. I also spoke to those delivering aid and food. The situation on the ground is not acceptable. It is not acceptable that the EU has not responded in a strong enough way. That is why we need the EU to respond collectively, which is what I have been advocating for while at the same time tabling the legislation that is going through the Houses.”
“It would also have a greater effect in actually changing the Israeli Government's actions. Ultimately, that is what we are trying to achieve here. Whether it is recognising Palestine, whether it is the case that we are taking with South Africa in respect of the genocide, whether it is the work we have been doing to provide support in respect of the humanitarian catastrophe or whether it is the situation in Lebanon and the West Bank that we have raised time and again, everything that we are doing is to change the actions of the Israeli Government. The Israeli Government is heading in one direction and one direction only. By taking action at EU level, we will have a greater impact. That is the objective. I fully appreciate the position of all Deputies present.”
“Depending on what way states vote, it can differ depending on the matter being voted on. I advocated for the Commission to bring forward these proposals and am pleased to say that at the most recent Foreign Affairs Council meeting, a commitment was finally given by the Commission to bring forward proposals before the next meeting. For our first Foreign Affairs Council as President of the EU Council the Commission has agreed to bring forward proposals, which we will discuss, and my objective is that we would debate them. The reason services are not included in the legislation is because the legal basis is not the same as that relating to goods, and how it would be implemented is not clear. All of us believe that for the EU as a whole to respond collectively, we would legally have that basis.”
“That needs to change so I have been advocating for a number of months now that the Commission would bring forward stronger proposals than those on the table, but also proposals that we know might actually pass a vote. The suspension of the EU-Israel Association Agreement was proposed by the Commission last year. Unfortunately, there was very clearly not a consensus, which is what is needed to vote specifically to suspend the agreement. What I and my counterparts from a number of member states have advocated for is that there should be a ban on trade within the illegal occupied territories. This is something that can be voted on through the Trade Council , by means of qualified majority voting, QMV. For those who are not aware, QMV requires 55% of the overall population of the voting member states.”
“For those reasons, the Government's approach is to proceed with measures that can effectively be implemented and sustained in practice. I have made no secret of saying that we have also taken into account the possible implications for our own economy here, but that is not the main factor. I want to be very clear on that. We have had clear directions or indications from the US and other states. However, that would apply to any legislation being brought forward. I am very clearly bringing forward legislation. I want to ensure that this is enacted before the summer recess. Most importantly, I want to ensure that we can fulfil our ICJ commitments more broadly by ensuring that the EU moves as one. I believe that the EU has not done enough and I do not believe that we have been strong enough in our response.”
“This was highlighted in the ICJ's ruling in 2024. It allows member states to adopt restrictions for public policy reasons. However, there is no equivalent broad public policy basis in EU law in relation to external trade in services. Trade in services also differs fundamentally from trade in goods. Services are digital, they cross borders, they are intangible in nature and operate across multiple legal and regulatory frameworks, creating significant implementation and enforcement challenges. Introducing legislation that lacks clarity as to how it may be implemented or enforced is not something that Government does. We need to be conscious of that. The Government must also ensure also that measures adopted are not only politically meaningful but also legally defensible and practically enforceable, as I have said.”
“I was asked last week who would possibly challenge legislation like this. The answer is that simply anybody can. There is an obligation to ensure that any legislation that I or this Government introduce is not open to challenge immediately. This is particularly relevant in relation to services. The Government sought and received advice from the Attorney General regarding the legal permissibility of an EU member state introducing restrictions relating to trade and services with a third country or a territory. There are two principal issues in relation to services, namely the legal basis under EU law and the practical challenges relating to the implementation and overall enforcement of this legislation. In the case of goods, a public policy exemption exists within the relevant EU framework governing imports.”
“This was identified in the ICJ's advisory opinion of 2024 in which it very clearly stated that obligation on states to take steps to prevent trade or investment relations that assist in maintaining the illegal situation created by Israel in the occupied Palestinian territories. There are now almost 1 million illegal settlers in the occupied territories. These are not small villages or settlements, as we often think. There are almost 1 million people that have been placed illegally in settlements. This is absolutely impacting any possibility of a future two-state solution. On the issue of services, I have set out, most recently on Committee Stage last week, that the Government has a responsibility to ensure that any legislation introduced is legally sustainable, enforceable in practice and capable of withstanding challenge.”
“I think we are all united by a desire to take action in response to the actions by the current Israeli Government that breach human rights and the unilateral actions that completely undermine the viability of the two-state solution. This has been evident during the debate in this House and when Committee Stage was debated at two meetings of the select committee last week. We will debate the Bill further next week and the following week. The Bill fulfils our commitment as set out in the programme for Government. Most importantly, it will contribute positively to our compliance with our international legal obligations.”
“I propose to take Questions Nos. 7, 8, 20, 38, 60 and 65 together. I thank the Deputies for tabling these questions. The Government approved the text of the Israeli Settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (Prohibition of Importation of Goods) Bill 2026 on 26 May. The Bill was published on 29 May and was introduced in Dáil Éireann on 10 June. It is very much my intention that the legislation will complete the parliamentary approval process by the summer recess. I thank Deputies for working with me to ensure that we achieve that outcome. I am very conscious of the strength of not just interest but the feeling and the desire among members of this House when it comes to this Bill and what it is that we all want to achieve.”
“Our position through that co-operation agreement should be to ramp up and enhance that dialogue and engagement, particularly at a time where we are seeing devastating consequences for many people because of the sanctions or the blockade that has been imposed.”
“What we want to do is ensure that the dialogue and the structure are there. We have an EU-Cuba political dialogue and co-operation agreement. There are some calls for that to be reviewed or changed. We need to look at the structure that is there now. We need to engage directly with that government. There have been concerns around human rights, democracy, government concerns and how we work directly with the government to address those concerns while at the same time engaging directly with the US. This is about dialogue. The only way this is going to be resolved is through dialogue and through the US engaging directly with Cuba but also the Cuban Government addressing and responding to some of the significant challenges that been identified by the international community.”
“There are two things here. We need to make sure the European and international community are very clear in our view and position on this. Ireland has been very clear and taken a very clear position. Over a number of years, although we are discussing the fact things have escalated further, we have had ongoing dialogue and contact with the US on a range of international issues. That includes Cuba. We have relayed and conveyed our concerns directly with them. We have communicated our position on the US embargo, the impact of the embargo and the international response to the humanitarian crisis but also the importance of maintaining diplomatic engagement. Earlier on this year, there was progress made between the Cuban Government and the US. However, that then shifted and changed. This continuing approach has not changed.”
“As the Deputy said and we all agree, the main people who are suffering here are civilians and citizens who cannot access medicines, cannot get food to those who need it and cannot go about their daily business in the way the Deputy or I can.”
“I understand Cuba has requested an additional debate at the UN General Assembly on 7 July next week due to the escalation of measures that have been taken by the US in recent months, as well as threats of military action. While this is strictly procedural and it is to vote on whether there will be a further debate on this, we will be voting in favour on 7 July that we would have a wider discussion on this, so we can discuss and assess the current humanitarian situation and that we can use our position within the UN and our voice to call for this type of embargo and these types of sanctions to be lifted.”