Thomas Byrne
Meath East · Fianna Fáil · Ireland
“We are very proud of the work they do in what are often very dangerous circumstances. Let us be 100% clear: our troops will only ever do peacekeeping, peace enforcement or conflict prevention in accordance with the principles of the UN Charter and, of course, as with every action of this Government, in accordance with the Constitution.”
“To be clear on what our troops will be doing, they will be doing peacekeeping, peace enforcement and conflict prevention. That is what the law says; not what the Deputy imagines it to be. We are bound by our Constitution and international law. The legislation changes nothing in that regard.”
“We are bound by international law. We are bound by international law since our Constitution came into force and we continue to be bound by international law and always will be, no matter what happens to this legislation. International law governs what we do as a Government.”
“I propose to take Questions Nos. 125, 140, 157 and 185 together. I am taking this question on behalf of the Minister. A commitment to reform what is known as the triple lock was set out in the programme for Government.”
“-----in accordance with UN principles and, of course, in accordance with our own Constitution, which commits us to peace and friendly relations among nations. The triple lock is a statutory mechanism.”
“Switzerland, the classical neutral country that is not even a member of the European Union and will never join the European Union, it is so neutral and independent, accepts UN, EU and OSCE mandates. I understand the situation is similar in Austria, which is another neutral country. By the way, it is also similar in Germany.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,013 lines we hold for Thomas Byrne, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 7 of 21.
“Here in Ireland, the Taoiseach will host a meeting of the European Political Community, the largest event of its kind ever held in this State, bringing together Heads of State and Government, from 47 European countries to Dublin. I think about the founding fathers and mothers of this country and how proud they would be to see a Taoiseach of Ireland leading 47 Heads of State and Government in Dublin as an equal partner with all of them. We will host an informal meeting of the European Council. We will host up to 22 informal ministerial meetings, with approximately a quarter of these taking place outside Dublin - in every corner of this country - ensuring that the EU Presidency is truly national in its reach. We will set out our full EU Presidency priorities and policy programme in early June, as is traditional.”
“We will chair the Council's work, across all its formations. We will set agendas, build consensus, broker compromise and move forward a legislative programme of enormous breadth and consequence. We will do this in the interests of all 27 member states. That impartiality is precisely what an EU Presidency is about, and what gives it its authority and influence. The scale of what lies ahead is significant. In Brussels and Luxembourg alone, our Ministers will chair dozens of formal Council meetings. Our officials will lead the work of approximately 180 Council preparatory bodies, most of which meet on a very regular basis. We will lead the Council's legislative engagement, with the European Parliament, across dozens of policy areas. We will chair negotiations in a range of international multilateral forums, including in the UN framework.”
“The European Union protected the peace process in Northern Ireland during Brexit - when the protection of that peace was our first priority - and I restate my thanks to our fellow EU member states, their citizens, parliamentarians and government members for their solidarity during that time. Our EU membership helped us through the financial crisis. It helped us through a global pandemic. For Ireland, EU membership is not a political abstraction; it is the lived reality of every business, every farmer, every student and every family in this State. The Taoiseach has described Ireland's EU Presidency, as a Presidency that will be defined by action. This is a commitment rooted in a clear understanding of what a Council Presidency is, and what it demands. During the Irish EU Presidency, we will act as an honest broker.”
“Before I turn to the work ahead, I want to spend a moment on what the European Union has meant for Ireland because it is important, particularly in this House, to say it plainly. In over 53 years of EU membership, Ireland has been transformed. When we joined in 1973, we were an economy heavily dependent on one trading partner, the United Kingdom, with limited access to international markets and no seat at the table, in any of the decisions that shaped our Continent. Our membership of the European Union changed all that. It gave Irish businesses access to a market of 450 million people. It gave Irish students the freedom to study across Europe. It gave Irish workers the right to live and work in 27 countries. It underpinned the Common Agricultural Policy, which supports our farming communities.”
“Is mór an onóir dom labhairt sa Dáil inniu ar ócáid Lá na hEorpa. As Minister of State with responsibility for European affairs, I am proud to speak today to mark Europe Day. In less than eight weeks' time, on 1 July 2026, Ireland will take on the Presidency of the Council of the EU for the eighth time. The European project was not built for easy times. It was built precisely for moments like this, and it is delivering for Europe and for the people of Europe. Ba mhaith liom trí rud a dhéanamh inniu. First, I want to acknowledge the significance of this Europe Day, in the context of our Presidency of the Council. Second, I want to set out the priorities Ireland intends to pursue. Third, I want to speak honestly about what is at stake, for Ireland and for Europe, as we prepare to lead.”
“There have been no proposals in the General Assembly to continue a mission in Lebanon. At the end of the day the Security Council is the authoritative body on international security. That is just the reality of the situation. We have an incredibly proud track record of peacekeeping under our Constitution and consistent with UN principles. We would like that to continue. In the current environment it literally cannot continue in Lebanon because of the decision of the UN Security Council. That mandate is coming to an end because of a decision effectively of one country. If another peacekeeping mission were agreed, for example at EU level, we could not take part in it under the current legislation. All we are trying to do is to make our own sovereign decisions and continue the peacekeeping work that we have done over many generations.”
“All deployments of Irish troops abroad under this legislation have to be consistent with the principles of the UN Charter and international law. I have already said that I agree with the Deputy in relation to the Constitution. However, I suggest that nobody in this House agrees with the decision of the UN Security Council to end peacekeeping duties in Lebanon.”
“It is also a fact that if a mission were to continue, for example under EU auspices, in Lebanon, it is entirely unclear as to whether Ireland could take part in that without a UN Security Council mandate. Operation Irini would continue as a very effective peacekeeping mission but Ireland would not be able to be part of it without a UN Security Council mandate.”
“The Deputy is correct that under Article 29 of the Constitution, Ireland's international relations are founded upon international justice and morality. Our Constitution affirms our "devotion to the ideal of peace and friendly co-operation amongst nations". That is not changing. That is in our Constitution. That is the entire basis on which the Government exercises its foreign policy. The removal of the triple lock in current circumstances has no impact whatsoever on Ireland's policy of military neutrality. All it means is that we are not giving the authority to any of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council to determine what our foreign policy is in terms of our peacekeeping missions. It is a fact that the UNIFIL mission was stopped, effectively, by one member of the UN Security Council.”
“Similar issues arise in respect of other operations, with concerns arising in relation to the upcoming renewal of the UN mandate of Operation Irini in the Mediterranean in early June. The outcome is currently unclear and if this mandate is not renewed, it would necessitate the immediate withdrawal of Irish troops under the current legislative provisions. The mission would continue nonetheless in its humanitarian work and its work to prevent illegal weapons coming into Europe because it is an EU mission. The Bill also provides for reinforced safeguards governing any future overseas deployments. While the UN Security Council mandate requirement is being removed, the legislation expressly requires that all such deployments be consistent with the principles of the UN Charter and with international law.”
“There has been extensive engagement between the Department and the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel on the drafting of the Bill, and the Minister intends to bring the Bill to the Government for approval shortly. As previously outlined to the House, the continued reliance on a UN Security Council mandate can have direct practical consequences for Ireland’s peacekeeping engagements. A very recent and tangible example is in relation to UNIFIL. We saw one power exercising its veto at the UN Security Council. Had the mandate for UNIFIL not been renewed - as was the case for a short period of time - Ireland would have been legally obliged to plan for the immediate withdrawal of Defence Forces personnel from that mission.”
“As set out by the Minister earlier in this session, the purpose of the defence (amendment) Bill is to consolidate the existing provisions of the Defence Acts concerning the despatch of members of the Defence Forces for service outside the State. In effect, the requirement for a UN mandate will be removed. It will modify the existing requirement regarding the so-called triple lock mechanism in relation to the despatch of the Defence Forces for service outside the State as part of an international United Nations force. It is important to note that the Bill will also seek to amend the Defence Act to provide for the suspension of members of the Defence Forces, thereby giving effect to recommendations in the 2024 Ward report on the management of members of the Defence Forces charged with, or convicted of, serious criminal offences.”
“The question of discontinuing the provisional application of the agreement in such circumstances would then have to be considered at EU level following the usual EU procedures and provision of the agreement in question. That is a fact. I look forward to Committee Stage.”
“I will happily do so and try to persuade them of where they have gone wrong. Clearly things went wrong before, the Supreme Court declared that and gave a pathway. We are doing our utmost to comply with the advice or suggestions of the Supreme Court with this Arbitration (Amendment) Bill to allow us in Dáil Éireann to ratify the CETA trade agreement. I will make one more point on if we were to decide not to ratify. This is the big question. The Senator said it does not matter if we do not ratify. If we did not, we would be obliged to formally notify this to the General Secretariat of the Council of European Union prior to any action being required on the part of Commission.”
“There was no suggestion the smoky coal ban was the victim of some international treaty because it is in force, as brought in under the previous Government. A lot is going on. I read the email that has been circulated this evening. It certainly does not relate to the reality of what is in the EU-Canada Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement. There is no reality to that. Each state's right to regulate is expressly provided for in the treaty and the various documents. I look forward to taking this to Committee Stage. We will have a very full debate on Committee Stage.”
“The joint interpretative instruments states: CETA preserves the ability of the European Union and its Member States and Canada to adopt and apply their own laws and regulations that regulate economic activity in the public interest, to achieve legitimate public policy objectives such as the protection and promotion of public health, social services, public education, safety, the environment, public morals, social or consumer protection, privacy and data protection and the promotion and protection of cultural diversity. In other words, the joint interpretative statement categorically contradicts all of the allegations that have been made.”
“They also provide that investment protection provisions shall not be interpreted as a commitment from governments that their legal frameworks will remain unchanged. It does not tell the Oireachtas it cannot change the law for public benefit. The agreements further clarify that the fact a measure may negatively affect an investment or investor's expectation of profits is not sufficient to say the measure is inconsistent with the agreements. I draw the attention of the Seanad to the commitment to preserving the right to regulate is reflected not only in the substantive articles addressing the issue but also in the preamble to the agreements, in the general treaty structure and, to address concerns with CETA, a joint interpretative instrument was drafted.”
“A number of issues have been raised by Senators. One relates to the right to regulate. I have to call out Senator Sarah O'Reilly's suggestion that there is some route for a company to sue for lack or profits. I suggest that Senators who make these statements and claims of misinformation in the Seanad read the treaty. The treaty states in CETA Article 8.9(2): For greater certainty, the mere fact that a Party regulates, including through a modification to its laws, in a manner which negatively affects an investment or interferes with an investor's expectations, including its expectations of profits, does not amount to a breach of an obligation under this Section. The agreements include Articles which affirm that parties and governments preserve their right to regulate for public policy purposes.”
“It is one we put in the programme for Government that we wanted to do. The Government has very carefully considered the decision of the Supreme Court in the Costello case. Unlike the Opposition, we have not picked and chosen certain paragraphs of the decision we like or do not like. Mr. Justice Hogan's recommendations and suggestion were endorsed by the Supreme Court. Let us not start this American system of four, three, six, one; six of the judges endorsed that. One did not and that judge was highlighted by Senator McDowell but six of the Supreme Court judges agreed with Mr. Justice Hogan. The Government now in putting this Bill forward is addressing what the Supreme Court suggested and addressing its findings in order to ensure Irish law may enable Ireland's ratification of these EU trade and investment agreements.”
“The investment protection provisions include the principals of non-discrimination, fair and equitable treatment and compensation in case of expropriation. They do absolutely nothing to affect a state's ability to regulate. The approach of the Government in bringing forward the legislation has been questioned by many Senators. As Senators are aware, in the Costello case, the Supreme Court not only identified constitutional concerns that prevented the ratification of CETA as Irish law then stood, it also identified a legislative path for curing the very concerns that had been identified. We have a Supreme Court decision that told us that if we wished, if it was within our prerogative as an Oireachtas or a Government, we could cure the constitutional concerns by amending the arbitration act.”
“Our trade and investment and people to people relationships with Canada are deep, growing relationships resulting directly in huge employment. Our trade with Chile is more modest but it is growing and we can do more in relation to this. The Eu’s new investment protection chapters provide a robust legal framework that has been examined, verified, studied, interpreted and agreed by EU member states, the Council and the European Parliament. This is European democracy; we are the European Union. The investment protection provisions liberalise market access, simplify administrative procedures and encourage reciprocal investment. They do nothing in relation to the scare stories the Opposition is putting forward. Companies investing in Ireland want assurance. Irish companies want assurance when they go abroad.”
“The Government is committed to its ratification and supporting and working with Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič to support an ambitious EU trade agreement promoting new free trade agreements. In order to ratify this CETA agreement and the Chile agreement, an amendment to the Arbitration Act is necessary. We cannot take our economic success for granted. We must diversify our trading partners and do agreements and compromises with other countries in order that we may grow and create jobs and opportunities for all of our people. On our behalf, the European Union, which we are a part of, operates one of the most extensive trade networks on the globe with more than 40 countries, including Asian-Pacific regions and regions in the western world, all promoting a system of rules dedicated to open and fair competition.”
“Since joining the European Economic Community, EEC, as it was called in 1973, Ireland has emerged as one of the biggest investors and recipients of foreign direct investment worldwide. This has been transformational and a critical source of capital for developing new industries and innovative technologies at home and abroad, and now Irish companies are also investing around the world. We are in the top ten investors in Canada and in the USA. We promote this investment. We want an environment that is attractive, resilient and competitive for foreign investment in order that we can create jobs. This economic model has created hundreds of thousands of jobs for our people and raised our quality of life in standards and wages. It is an economic model we must protect and allow to grow. Ratifying CETA is a priority for the Government.”
“Gabhaim buíochas leis na Seanadóirí as na dtuairimí a chur siad roimh an tSeanaid anocht. I again remind people that the ultimate reason we are doing this is to put Ireland in a position where we can ratify various trade agreements. That is a separate process. Free and open trade has been at the heart of the Irish economy for decades. Multilateral agreements have been at the heart of Irish society and Irish life for decades, and the compromises that result from multilateral agreements have been at the heart of our economy, society and legal system for decades and are in fact a feature of any sovereign, independent State. We shifted our trade policy from protectionism toward an outward-looking, free trade approach and lifted millions of Irish people out of poverty by supporting job growth and investment.”
“Enactment of this legislation will enable Ireland, the Dáil and the Government decision to ratify CETA, the EU-Chile agreement as well as other EU-third country agreements with similar models of investment dispute resolution provisions. At a time when free trade and the benefits it has brought to the Irish economy is under increasing pressure, it is an important statement that Ireland is seeking to ratify these trade agreements, which will provide Irish companies and exporters with new opportunities to expand and grow trade overseas. Enactment of this legislation and the subsequent ratifications of the relevant trade and investment agreements will equally be an important signal to Ireland’s partners of our continuing commitment to multilateralism, to the international legal order and to the deepening of our bilateral relationships.”
“Section 5 of the Bill is also a standard provision and provides that the Act will come into operation on such day, or days, as the Minister orders after consultation with the Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration. While this is a short and technical Bill, it is a necessary step to enable the State to ratify these international agreements under the EU’s new investment dispute resolution regime. The Bill addresses the findings of the Supreme Court in the Costello case by introducing a procedure for the enforcement of such awards and specifying grounds upon which such awards may not be enforced in the jurisdiction.”
“Subsection (4) provides that there is no appeal from the High Court to the Court of Appeal on any determination by the High Court in relation to an application to enforce an award but that an appeal to the Supreme Court may be made if the Supreme Court accepts the appeal in accordance with the Constitution. Subsection (5) empowers the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, after consultation with the Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration, to make orders prescribing certain international agreements concerned with the protection of investment as ones to which the new section 25A will apply. Subsection (6) is a standard technical clause which specifies that every order made pursuant to subsection (5) must be laid before each House of the Oireachtas and may be annulled within 21 days. That is a standard clause.”
“Subsection 2(b)(ii) specifies that these awards are only enforceable in the State under section 25A. Subsection (3) declares, for the avoidance of doubt, that such an award: is not and never was enforceable in the State if enforcing the award would compromise— (a) the constitutional order of the State; or (b) the autonomy of the legal order of the European Union. This subsection addresses the constitutional impediment identified in the Costello case and specifies applicable grounds on which an award may not be enforced in this jurisdiction, which complement the new enforcement procedure introduced at subsection (2).”
“The new section 25A has six subsections that will establish a new procedure for the enforcement of awards made under relevant international agreements in the State. Subsection (1) of the new section 25A provides that the section applies to the EU agreements with Canada and Chile and to international agreements that are then prescribed by ministerial order. Subsection (2) provides that awards made pursuant to an international agreement to which the section applies will be enforceable in the State by leave of the High Court in the same manner as a judgment or order of the High Court. This reflects the requirement in the relevant international agreements that “execution of the award shall be governed by the laws concerning the execution of judgments or awards in force where the execution is sought”.”
“Statutory instruments pursuant to the new section 25A will further be required to prescribe other EU-third country agreements containing similar models of investment dispute resolution provisions, which could be with Vietnam, Singapore and Mexico, before those agreements can also be ratified. Senators have a copy of the Bill. It is a very short and technical Bill comprising five sections. Section 1 is a standard definitions provision. Sections 2 and 3 of the Bill make technical amendments to the 2010 Act to reflect changes that will be effected by the present Bill. I draw particular attention to section 4 of the Bill, which amends the Arbitration Act 2010 by inserting a new section 25A.”
“The Bill has been drafted in adherence to the Constitution and the international obligations which Ireland would assume upon ratification of the relevant international agreements. I wish to emphasise that passing this Bill ratifies neither CETA nor the EU-Chile Agreement, as these require separate Government decisions and Dáil motions under the Constitution. However, by curing the constitutional concerns identified by the Supreme Court in the Costello case, enactment of this Bill is an essential step towards ratification of these trade and investment agreements which are in Ireland’s economic interests.”
“The Supreme Court also held that the concerns identified in the Costello case could be cured, if amendments were made to the Arbitration Act 2010. The Supreme Court, in the Costello case, therefore not only identified constitutional concerns which prevented the ratification of CETA as the law then stood but also identified a legislative path for curing the concerns that had been identified. The Government has carefully considered the Supreme Court’s judgment and the Bill put before this House is presented in response. The Bill addresses the Costello case and will amend the Arbitration Act by introducing a new procedure in Irish law for the enforcement of awards in Ireland made by tribunals established under CETA and similar international agreements. It will specify applicable grounds on which an award may not be enforced.”
“Additionally, business services including operational leasing constituted 79% of the €980 million Irish trade in services to Chile in 2024. Chile is essential to the world economy supplying 27% of global copper and 32% of global lithium demand. For the EU, including Ireland, securing access to critical raw materials through the agreement with Chile is a cornerstone of our strategic autonomy, enabling the EU to reduce our reliance on dominant suppliers amidst intensifying global competition and providing crucial inputs to support the EU’s ambitious decarbonisation goals. As colleagues will be aware, in November 2022 the Supreme Court held in the Costello case that the Constitution precludes the Government and Dáil Éireann from ratifying CETA as Irish law then stood.”
“There has been ongoing high-level political engagement since the Irish Embassy opened including meetings between former President Higgins and former President Boric and then-Taoiseach, Deputy Simon Harris, and President Boric in 2024. Chile is one of South America’s most stable and prosperous countries. It leads the Latin American region in human development, competitiveness, income per capita and economic performance. Our exports to Chile are dominated by high-tech pharmaceuticals, medical devices and services. At a combined €342 million of exports and imports, Ireland has significantly increased trade in goods with Chile. In the past year alone, Ireland’s goods exports to Chile have grown by a remarkable 87%. That means real jobs in Ireland.”
“The agreement in its entirety can only apply fully once all internal processes are completed and this stands for the trade components as it does for the investment protection parts of the agreement. It cannot be argued successfully that we have secured the trade aspects of the agreement and therefore we do not need to ratify the agreement in full. The status of our ratification is actually raised bilaterally by Canada, including with myself directly, and indeed by the European Commission. The Bill also includes the EU-Chile Advanced Framework Agreement. Our relationship with Chile has been strengthened significantly by the opening of the Irish Embassy in Santiago in 2019 as part of the global Ireland programme and the delivery of commitments set out in Ireland’s strategy for Latin America and the Caribbean.”
“It shows potential for further trade and investment co-operation. Canadian companies employ more than 22,000 people in Ireland while Irish companies employ more than 19,000 people in Canada. It also highlights the potential to increase traded goods between our countries by €1.2 billion annually, a 34% rise, and to expand trade in services by almost €500 million. Claims have been made that we should not be concerned with ratifying CETA as the parts that provide for more open trading are provisionally applied. However, provisional application is not the same as ratification. Provisional application is an important mechanism that allows companies and consumers to benefit from a trade agreement at an early stage as the completion of ratification across all 27 member states in their democratic process can take a number of years.”
“The Government has significantly increased the State's diplomatic presence across Canada. We continue to invest in partnerships at city, provincial and federal level. Canada is a key export market for Ireland and an important focus for Ireland's new market diversification strategy. CETA has contributed to a significant increase in Ireland's bilateral trade in goods and services with Canada since its provisional application in 2017. This trade increased from €3.2 billion in 2016 to more than €12 billion in 2024, supporting thousands of jobs and benefiting large and small businesses throughout the country. The facts show that CETA has been good for Irish business, Irish jobs and Irish households. A report on further deepening trade between Ireland and Canada was launched by the Taoiseach during his Ottawa visit.”
“I will highlight one EU trade agreement specified in the Bill that combines more open trading alongside investment protection provisions. I refer here to CETA, which is one of the most important and beneficial trade agreements concluded by the EU. It has already proven enormously beneficial for citizens and businesses in the EU and Canada. Ireland enjoys particularly strong political, economic and cultural ties with Canada, based on our shared history and a shared commitment to democracy, human rights and a rules-based international order. Over 4.4 million Canadians, more than one in ten of the population, claim Irish ancestry. When the Taoiseach was in Ottawa in last September, he invited the Prime Minister, Mr. Carney, who is one of those Canadians with Irish heritage, to visit Ireland this year.”
“Those reforms include: providing for standing two-tier tribunals established under each agreement, as opposed to the ad hoc establishment of ISDS panels; cases being allocated at random so that the disputing parties do not know in advance which tribunal members will decide on their case; strict requirements on the qualifications and independence of members of the tribunals; detailed transparency rules; and provisions to prevent abuses, including early dismissal of claims that are manifestly without legal merit. I emphasise that there are very clear provisions preserving the parties' right to regulate for public policy purposes. This means that the Government and these Houses have the right to take measures to achieve legitimate public policy objectives.”
“I draw the attention of Senators to the fact that to date no cases have been decided under the investment court system because none of the agreements containing this new dispute resolution system has yet entered into force. The shortcomings attributed to the old system include a perception that the ad hoc tribunals provided under other forms of investment agreements and treaties lack predictability, legal certainty, transparency, independence and impartiality, and that there is a risk of regulatory chill, that is, a perceived reluctance to amend regulation, for fear of being sued by an investor. To overcome these perceived shortcomings, the EU and its member states put forward reforms to address these concerns head-on.”
“It is important to emphasise that the investment dispute resolution provisions in this new generation of EU trade agreements we are concerned with differ significantly from the long-standing investor-State dispute settlement system, ISDS, which is included in most bilateral investment treaties. Given that Ireland does not have any bilateral investment treaties, there are some misconceptions about how these tribunals will operate. In light of the shortcomings that have been identified in cases brought under the old ISDS system, the EU and its member states have developed the new investment court system contained in relevant EU trade and investment agreements. This new system introduces crucial reforms to address concerns regarding ISDS.”
“These agreements also help to promote EU values globally, from labour standards to human rights to climate action. Recent EU trade agreement negotiations have included dedicated chapters or stand-alone agreements providing for the protection of investment. As such, EU trade agreements include investment liberalisation commitments that provide an important advantage to EU companies, including Irish companies, in accessing third country markets. Investment protection provisions, including investment dispute resolution, are a logical complement of the liberalisation provisions. Together, investment liberalisation and protection ensure a business-friendly environment and provide a stable legal framework that encourages investment flows between the EU and third countries.”
“EU membership amplifies our voice, strengthens our influence and enables us to advocate for solutions that work for Ireland, Europe, the wider global economy and people, but we cannot be complacent. The international environment is more volatile, unpredictable and transactional than at any time in recent decades. In response to the geopolitical turbulence that all EU member states find themselves facing, the Government is working to make the Irish economy more competitive and resilient to economic shocks. The Bill seeks to put Ireland in a position whereby we can ratify the range of EU trade and investment agreements from which we derive massive benefit. Through the EU we have been part of an expanding network of free trade agreements that create opportunities for exports and investment, support jobs and growth at home.”
“Enactment of the Bill is an essential step towards ratification of international agreements concerning the European Union's new generation investment dispute resolution regime. It is important to consider that this is a new generation investment dispute resolution regime. This is my fourth time to debate this Bill in the Oireachtas. It passed all Stages in the Dáil. I look forward to the Seanad's examination of the Bill today and to Committee and Remaining Stages. Before we consider the detail of the Bill, it is important to outline the wider context of Ireland's and the EU's trade and investment policies. Trade and our trading relationships with partners around the world are a central feature of our economic model. This is how we pay the national wage.”
“Tá áthas orm teacht isteach anseo agus an Dara Chéim den Bhille Eadrána (Leasú), 2025 os comhair an tSeanaid agus faoi bhráid na Seanadóirí. The purpose of this Bill is to amend the Arbitration Act 2010 in order to enable effect to be given in the State to the provisions of certain international agreements relating to the protection of investment. The programme for Government agreed following the 2024 general election commits to the ratification of the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement, CETA, between the European Union and Canada and to supporting an ambitious EU trade agenda promoting new free trade agreements. Interestingly, in today's EMI poll on the European Union, trade is one of the areas the Irish public thinks the European Union is doing a good job on.”
“Ratifying the convention does not make Ireland liable for those costs. Russia should pay these costs through reparations. When the convention opened for signature in December of last year, Ireland was among the 36 states or bodies that signed it. Now, let us be among the first of the states to ratify it and take another step towards putting the principle of accountability into action. It goes without saying that no award or amount of financial compensation will change or even make good the devastating damage and destruction inflicted on Ukraine, its people and its communities by the Russian Federation in the course of this war. Nonetheless, it is incumbent on us, along with our international partners, to put in place a system that can hold Russia to account when the time comes.”
“It is Ireland continuing to support the principle of accountability and continuing to support the important steps being taken, by the Council of Europe, not the European Union, towards delivering accountability. In the coming weeks, we will vote in favour of a resolution at the Council of Europe ministerial meeting in Chișinău to advance the establishment of the special tribunal on the crime of aggression against Ukraine. We now have the opportunity to ratify the convention establishing an international claims commission for Ukraine, an administrative body that will assess the damages, loss or injury inflicted by Russia on Ukraine. It is worth reiterating that the claims commission will not be responsible for making any compensation payments. Instead, it will assess and determine claims for compensation.”
“I was humbled by their ability to maintain a functioning state and administration in the face of invasion. It underlined for me the real potential for Ukraine to flourish when this terrible conflict ends. Of course, the people in Ukraine look to the day when peace returns and they can build a brighter future. When that day comes and the war finally ends, it will be vitally important that preparations have been made and mechanisms put in place to ensure that Russia can be held to account for its actions. The establishment of the claims commission is one clear step that we can take in preparation for that. It is a relatively small step from a practical perspective but politically it sends an important message. Ireland ratifying the convention is Ireland continuing to lend its unwavering support to Ukraine.”
“I saw the reality of living with constant fear, unpredictability and, of course, devastating loss. I saw the effects of Russian attacks on Ukraine’s energy and civilian infrastructure in the middle of a brutal, bitter winter. Russia fired over 6,800 long-range drones and missiles into Ukraine in April alone, more than nine attacks per hour, night and day, every day in April, leaving Ukraine, as a nation without sleep. Since the Russian Federation launched its full scale invasion in February 2022, more than 15,000 civilians have been killed, 41,000 have been injured, millions have been displaced and untold damage has been caused to civilian property and infrastructure. I also witnessed the tenacity and commitment of the Ukrainian people.”
“Today, as we pursue a constitutional obligation to ratify an international agreement, we have an opportunity to say "No" by saying "Yes" and voting "Tá". We have an opportunity to say "No" to Russia’s unprovoked and unjustified war of aggression, to death and destruction with impunity, to rewarding Russia for stealing Ukrainian land and the forcible removal of Ukrainian children and to inflicting unspeakable suffering and damage without consequence and to say "Yes" to justice, consequences, responsibility, reparation and, above all, accountability. During my visit to Kyiv in March, I witnessed first hand the strength and endurance of Ukraine’s leaders and people, as well the reality on the ground of a country at war, living with the relentless presence of war and Russian violence as part of everyday life.”