I admit if I were a non-Catalan Spaniard, I probably would not want to see a break-up of Spain because no doubt it would be followed by other regions such as the Basque region or Galicia. However, the question has to be asked as to why there is this desire for self-determination. Why has it arisen now particularly? It does come back to the central Government in Madrid not being willing to engage in that dialogue that we all think is so very important. Under international law, as others have stated, sovereignty is a most important foundation. Although this is a sovereign question for Spain, the situation has been worsened by what we can only describe as bully-boy tactics from Madrid fuelled, I believe, by the shortage of a democratic tradition in Spain’s history.

A couple of years ago, I was in Barcelona at the invitation of Diplocat, with a number of Deputies and Senators. Diplocat is a public private partnership and is all about fostering dialogue and building relations between the citizens of Catalonia and other countries. They were looking for the active involvement of Catalan society in exchanging views and ideas in areas like government, business, culture and education. It was all about promoting a fairer, more peaceful, democratic and sustainable world. We met a number of Catalan stakeholders including political parties, civil society and members of the Government of Catalonia. Those meetings were open and frank. We met people who were pro-independence and those who were against it. We met those who were in favour of a more federal type system of government that would respect the culture, identity and ethnicity of all of the regions. Since then, I have met a number of other Catalan leaders and communities. One thing that came across was that they were very proud of the relationship between Ireland and Catalonia.

The observers also noted the very peaceful nature of the Catalan people. The violence and repression really shows how we do not learn from history. We know from history that repression only fuels and hardens those who are being repressed. We saw it in our own history in 1916. Prior to the executions in 1916, everybody wanted Home Rule but after them it was a very different matter. It is very likely that those Catalans who did not want independence will be hardened in their attitude and will be joining the pro-independence movement. We could look at the example from Scotland. Although there are historic differences between the two countries, it is the same principle. What we saw in Scotland was dignified debate. The two sides – “Better Together” and “Yes Scotland” – could debate all of those issues. It goes back to the right to self-determination as a principle in international law. The EU only saw that as applying for states that are already recognised as independent.

The European Court of Justice has ruled that Article 1 of the charter guarantees the right of self-determination to states that are not yet independent. The history of Catalonia, dating back to Ferdinand and Isabella, is a difficult one but there is no doubt but that Catalonia has a separate culture, identity and language regardless of that legal standing internationally. I called on the Minister to use his position to advance political dialogue. He is a member of Fine Gael, who are member of the European People’s Party, EPP, of which the ruling party in Spain is also a member, he is in a unique position to advance that dialogue.

I have seen reports and pictures depicting the so-called migrant centres. I have heard testimonies from some of those who have survived the search and rescue operations in the Mediterranean. As a result of the political situation in Libya and the lack of rule of law, people are being held arbitrarily. No one knows how the detention system is working. The inhumane conditions do not meet any national, regional or international standards. They are dangerously overcrowded. There is no light and no ventilation. The sanitation areas are unsuitable. There are health hazards. There is no running water in many of them. Where the availability of running water has been improved, unhindered 24-hour access to toilets is not widespread. There are cases of extreme violence and abuse from people in authority in these centres, as well as from smugglers and criminal gangs. Injuries like fractured bones, open wounds, cigarette burns and lash marks have been documented.

There have been many instances of malnutrition in the migrant centres. The global acute malnutrition rate was 5% in some of these centres. The rate of acute malnutrition was 10% in one particular centre. Non-governmental organisations would not see that extent of adult malnutrition in emergency nutritional crises in Africa. There are concerns about the calorie content of the food being given to people in these centres. People in some centres are being fed from communal bowls. One can imagine the scramble for food that results. This has a particular effect on the young, the disabled and the sick. People who have been rescued in the Mediterranean have spoken openly about the abuse and sexual violence that is occurring at these centres. Many of the illnesses that are appearing are preventable under normal circumstances. There have been instances of torture, forced labour and financial exploitation. I am setting out the facts of the situation.

Many of these people in the centres were “rescued” in the Mediterranean and brought to Sicily before being returned to Libya. I acknowledge the courage of our Navy personnel who are involved in search and rescue operations. However, we must note that many of those who are rescued from drowning are left in appalling and inhumane conditions. During a rescue operation in the Mediterranean in May 2017, members of the Libyan coastguard approached a boat loaded with distressed migrants and intimidated the passengers by firing gunshots into the air. They came onto their boat to relieve them of phones, money and other belongings. We are told that members of the Libyan coastguard have received training and support from the EU. Evidence of that is not to be seen. I have read the testimony of a survivor who jumped into the water because he preferred to die at sea than to be repressed and to die in Libya.

During this year’s election campaigns in Europe, we are being reminded of the importance of core European values in the context of the political situation in Europe. Ireland was instrumental in developing the sustainable development goals as a member of the UN Human Rights Council. We are respected for our untied aid. We are trusted. I am proposing that the concerns I have expressed about the facts that are emerging from the migrant centres should be raised at this month’s meeting of the Foreign Affairs Council. Ireland, through the Minister of State with responsibility for EU matters, should speak up for the people who are being treated appallingly in these detention centres. If we do not do so, there is something seriously wrong with our moral and ethical values here and in Europe.

Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (Deputy Dara Murphy): I am glad to have an opportunity to address the House on this important matter. I thank Deputy Maureen O’Sullivan for raising it. I agree with her that everyone has been moved by the terrible images and distressing reports of men, women and children drowning in the Mediterranean. We all agree that such terrible and appalling incidents should not be happening on the doorstep of the EU in the 21st century. The migration crisis is one of the greatest challenges ever to face the EU. It has been discussed at almost every European Council meeting in recent months. It will be on the agenda for the next Council meeting later this month. It has been addressed by foreign affairs and justice Ministers on many occasions. The EU has responded to the migration crisis by adopting a range of measures to deal with this global mass movement of people. As Deputy O’Sullivan has said, it has engaged with countries of origin and transit to address the root causes of migration, for example through tailor-made migration compacts. This has involved the agreement of a plan to relocate migrants from Italy and Greece across the EU. Operation Sophia has been launched with the intention of disrupting people-smuggling in the Mediterranean. Substantial financial assistance has been provided to Libya and other countries that are hosting large numbers of migrants.

The past year has seen the main focus shifting from Turkey and Greece to the so-called south Mediterranean route which, as the Deputy mentioned, is the route from Libya to Italy. So far this year, approximately 59,000 people have made the journey. Tragically, the International Organisation for Migration estimates that 1,480 people have drowned.
In March, European Union Heads of State and Government set out the European Union’s commitment to assist Libya in the Malta Declaration. That commitment has quite a broad range of measures, including capacity building, training and the provision of equipment and support for the Libyan national coastguard and other agencies. It also seeks to ensure that there is adequate reception capacity in Libya for migrants, including by working with the UN High Commissioner for Refugees.
In April, a €90 million programme was approved to step up the protection of migrants, as the Deputy has described, and to reinforce better migration management in Libya. Some €4.8 million of that is aimed at protection activities and €42 million is aimed at socio-economic development at municipal level and local governance. This programme will be implemented through a number of international agencies, including the UN High Commissioner for Refugees and UNICEF. This is in addition to the €120 million already announced by the European Union for migration-related support for Libya to assist authorities and the population. The European Union will continue to closely monitor the migration situation in Libya to see what additional support is required. The reason for such targeted funding is an acceptance of the facts, as highlighted by the Deputy, that there was significant work and difficulty on the ground in Libya that needs to be addressed.

Deputy Maureen O’Sullivan: I thank the Minister of State. The facts I presented have come from reports and I have pictures, which I can show to the Minister. When he looks at them I believe he would say that drowning would be preferable to ending up in one of those detention centres. We agree these incidents should not be happening, but they are, so there is a need to rethink in this regard. There was horror in 2008 when a deal emerged between the former Prime Minister, Silvio Berlusconi, and Colonel Gaddafi involving a huge amount of money being paid so that Colonel Gaddafi would keep migrants in Libya so that they would not get to Italy, but the same thing is happening today. Some of the migrants have been in Libya for more than 20 years because they were oil workers. They are now in these detention centres.
How much Irish aid – which we are very good at – is going into these detention centres? The Minister of State mentioned vast sums of money, but where exactly is it going? Obviously, it is into the pockets of these criminal gangs who are abusing the situation. One of the replies we got to a parliamentary question stated that the policies are bespoke solutions to the migration problem. That is not good enough because we are fuelling so much pain, horror and, I believe, dissent, and we wonder why people are rebelling against these sorts of conditions.
With regard to the Libyan coastguard, it appears that nobody is in control so each individual coastguard has carte blanche to do what it wants. It is very important that international organisations get into these centres. That is one thing that Ireland could be very strong on at the next Foreign Affairs Council meeting. We have to speak out about these human rights abuses because that is what they are.
With respect to the Libyan situation in general, a suggestion was mooted that there could be a role for the Department’s conflict resolution unit and perhaps that could be examined, but we cannot stand by and allow the conditions in those centres to continue as there are, being funded by the EU and by Ireland.

Deputy Dara Murphy: The evidence the Deputy presented is not disputed. There is an acceptance there is very significant difficulty and abuse of civil and human rights of the people in Libya. Certainly it is going too far to say that any circumstance is better than drowning. We have seen the great work our navy has done.
On the Deputy’s specific point about how the aid and the programmes will be distributed, it will be through UNICEF and the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. It is through their presence on the ground that the moneys are to be dispersed. As the Deputy said, there is not a government in Libya. Therefore, we must work to ensure that pressure can be brought to bear from the African Union, United Nations, the League of Arab States and the European Union, which are all working together, to encourage a process that has seen some limited progress to date but without an effective government in the country to guarantee and secure the human rights of people, it is extremely difficult.
This is not an excuse but it is a fact that it is only since April that this €90 million of funding has been approved to address the situation on the ground and to continue to work on the principle of working with countries of origin and countries of transit to ensure that people do not take, and are protected from being forced to take, these terrible perilous journeys that we see being taken. I accept that is a very late timeline given what we know to have been the case in Libya for a long number of months.

– The implications of Brexit for the UK’s contribution to humanitarian aid.

– The need greater transparency and accountability on exactly where EU development fund and trust fund moneys are going.

– With the British Government gone from policy formulation, we potential for a greater emphasis on untied aid which Ireland has always supported

– The potential positive outcomes for Ireland from Brexit, including the possibility of international financial sector firms moving here.

– Need for enhanced regulation and oversight of our tax policies because our reputation is already tarnished as a result of the term “tax haven” being applied to Ireland.

– There are countries in the EU with very regressive policies on refugees. The mantra seems to be “good migration management”, which means that the EU trust fund is being used for security and border management by states with appalling human rights records

– Yemen is experiencing as the worst humanitarian crisis across the globe, with 70% of the population depending on humanitarian assistance.
The conflict in Yemen is fuelled by official arms sales by some EU countries and other western states, primarily the UK and the USA

1. Ireland cannot get caught in the crossfire between the EU and the UK.

I heard the Prime Minister, Theresa May’s words recognising the unique relationship with the Republic and the importance of the peace process in Northern Ireland. However, the UK electorate took an utter gamble and there was a lack of thorough investigation and research into what Brexit would mean for the agreement. Whether one agrees with the Good Friday Agreement or not it has ensured peace, ease of movement and no hard Border. A generation of Irish, the people in Northern Ireland and the Border areas, have no memory of having to queue at Border crossings. While the Good Friday Agreement is recognised internationally it still raises concerns because if one leaves an organisation or club one cannot expect to enjoy the same benefits or advantages as when one was a member.

2. Now is the time to solve the unresovled issues from the Good Friday Agreement

There are unresovled issues from the Good Friday Agreement and there is a real danger they will continue to be left unresolved. I refer to issues relating to flags and parades, legacy issues such as the continuing wait for information on the Dublin-Monaghan bombings, and prisoner issues. These are very serious and continue to deteriorate. Licences are still being revoked, with Tony Taylor being the most recent case. He has been over a year in Maghaberry and he has a date in May for a parole commissioners’ hearing, which may happen but is more likely to be cancelled. The stock-take agreement and the work of the International Red Cross in the prison are being ignored and my fear is that, with Brexit, these human rights issues are going to move further down the scale of importance.

3. Create a specific strand to keep the peace

We need to look at the potential implications for reconciliation and the need for a specific strand to deal with the protection of the Good Friday Agreement. Theresa May spoke of the responsibility to ensure nothing was done to jeopardise the peace process but some issues are jeopardising the process and they are likely to be ignored or treated in a high-handed, authoritarian way because we know how fragile peace is. I was very struck by the evidence of a witness from the University of Ulster who was before the Joint Committee on the Implementation of the Good Friday Agreement recently. He had evidence from divided societies everywhere and the conclusion was that the implications of Brexit for identity and cultural issues may be more significant and potentially more dangerous in the long term than the specific economic consequences. His point was that uncertainty about identity and political issues can rapidly escalate into direct confrontation. I do not believe for one minute that there is any comparison between Northern Ireland and Gibraltar.

4. Tie up any tax loopholes

If international business and finance firms relocate to Ireland we have to look at them in terms of tax transparency because we need to reaffirm our commitment to country-by-country reporting and a public register of beneficial ownership. I am involved in official development assistance and am concerned about the implications for that of Britain leaving the EU. The UK has been a major contributor to the EU’s development budget and had a role in formulating development policy. Its eligible share of the general budget was €1.23 billion, out of €9 billion in ODA spending, and its share of the off-budget development fund from 2014 to 2020 was €4.48 billion, which will be a significant loss financially and from the point of view of policy. We need to look at the implications for developing countries of financial regulation and taxation practices because Brexit could bring about changes to tax and regulation which have to be examined. There is a real danger that the work of Irish Aid will be undermined.

Deputy Maureen O’Sullivan asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade if he will progress Ireland’s recognition of Palestine as a state, in view of the recent approval by the Israeli Government of further construction of settlements, the illegality of which has been reaffirmed by the United Nations Security Council and the violation of international law.

Deputy Maureen O’Sullivan: My question relates to the ongoing settlement issue in Palestine and our recognition of the two-state solution, particularly in view of the fact that the illegality of the settlements has been re-affirmed by the United Nations Security Council.

Deputy Charles Flanagan: As I have reported to the House on a number of occasions, I am keeping under continuous review whether the immediate recognition by Ireland of a state of Palestine, prior to its real achievement on the ground, could be helpful towards the goal of resolving the conflict and, if so, when that might have the greatest impact. My two visits to the region have contributed to that ongoing consideration. I have discussed the question with local leaders, EU colleagues and international colleagues outside of the European Union. The motions passed by the Dáil and the Seanad in this regard in 2014 are obviously important factors, but ultimately this is a decision for the Government. There are many factors to take into account, both positive and negative.
I am also acutely conscious that the situation on the ground has continued to deteriorate and efforts to reanimate the political process have not yet been successful. I condemned the recent surge of Israeli settlement announcements in a statement issued on 25 January. Continued settlement expansion runs directly contrary to the prospects of achieving a peaceful solution to the conflict in Palestine and has for this reason been a central focus of the policies I have advocated at EU level.
I discussed the matter earlier this afternoon with my colleague the French Foreign Minister, Mr. Jean-Marc Ayrault, who played a leading role in a Paris initiative culminating in an international conference in January to which Ireland was invited and in which it participated.
While the settlement announcements of recent times and ongoing do not directly relate to my consideration of the specific question of possible recognition, I have to say that recognition would not help to prevent settlement construction, as the existing recognition of Palestine by many other states clearly has not. However, it is certainly an indirect factor in that continued pressure on Palestinians is a strong argument in favour of a broadly supportive gesture such as recognition.
I am continuing to weigh these and other arguments in relation to recognition on an ongoing basis and I will be very happy to keep the Deputies and the House fully informed.

Deputy Maureen O’Sullivan: I thank the Minister. The settlement issue shows a disregard, a disdain and an indifference to international law and also to the United Nations Security Council. The ongoing policy of settlement expansion has to be seen in light of the possibility of the two-state solution. The Minister was there, as was I. When one is there and sees the extent of the settlement building one gets a real sense of whether it is possible to have a two-state solution.
Palestine is where we were. We had land grabs in this country, with Britain taking the land from Irish people. We remember Cromwell’s “to hell or to Connacht”. It was an attack on the land. It was also an attack on our culture and our traditions. My question is, how can we support a two-state solution when our Government does not recognise one of those states as a state. If we are committed to the two-state solution, surely it is logical that we recognise Palestine as a state. I would like to know how emphatic we are at EU and UN level in condemning what Israel is doing with settlements.

Deputy Charles Flanagan: I wish to assure to Deputy that as far as the latter is concerned, I will make it clear lest there is any doubt, these settlements are illegal, they actively undermine the prospects for a sustainable, negotiated two-state solution and the relentless expansion of settlements inherently involves injustice and provocation for Palestinians. The intention to proceed with new settlements in East Jerusalem only continues to call into question further the commitment of the Israeli Government to engage in meaningful negotiations aimed at achieving a two-state solution. The Irish Government fully recognises that the only objective manner in which a solution can be achieved is by means of a two-state solution. Ireland remains steadfast in its support for a comprehensive two-state solution which protects the future of both Palestinian people and Israelis.

Deputy Maureen O’Sullivan: The reality is that the settlements are continuing. I want to acknowledge the Israeli opposition to this as well. The vote in the Knesset was 60 to 52 and the Government’s top lawyer has called it unconstitutional.

A number of Israeli NGOs are actively opposing this regulation Bill. I acknowledge the information that SADAKA has sent. Many parliaments have voted to recognise a Palestinian state but it is not followed up by the governments. It has to be asked if we are just paying lip service to the idea of a Palestinian state. The European Parliament also voted in favour of the recognition. Sweden has had the moral gumption to stand up and there are no signs of any deterioration in its relationship with Israel. Why can Ireland not also do that? As the Minister has said, it is violating international law and going against the United Nations Security Council. There will be nothing left for Palestine to call a state if we continue to do nothing.

Deputy Charles Flanagan: That is precisely why this matter is under active consideration. I want to try to avoid lip service and ensure we can do something meaningful and positive. Recognition of Palestine would essentially be a symbolic step. It would not help slow the settlements. It would not prevent evictions or demolitions. It would not in any way hasten an end of the occupation. However, it would be a signal of support and hope to Palestinians at a time when the political process seems moribund. They are symbolic issues but important ones.
We need to ensure that Ireland makes a positive and constructive contribution. I am very pleased to engage on an ongoing basis with my EU colleagues. Ireland’s position has been made abundantly clear not only in the European Union but also at the international Paris conference where I spoke on behalf of Ireland in January.

The cash for ash has proven to be very costly not only in terms of the particular funds but in the ensuing fallout which sees Northern Ireland without a government or a parliament at a very critical time. We all live on this small island and there is significant movement of people and business back and forth across the Border. There are also institutions, projects and considerable co-operation between North and South. Brexit is a major challenge and Northern Ireland and the Republic must be seen as special cases.

An all-Ireland civic dialogue on Brexit took place on 2 November 2016. While a broad range of groups and individuals participated including NGOs, business organisations, trade unions, civil society representatives and politicians, one could not but note the glaring absence of Unionist representatives from the UUP and the DUP. What sort of message did that send out?

On a positive note, recently a report was prepared and published by the House of Lords EU committee on the impact of Brexit on British-Irish relations. The report agreed that the unique nature of those relations requires a “unique structure”. The committee called on the UK and Irish Governments to negotiate a draft bilateral agreement which would incorporate the views and the interests of the Northern Ireland Executive and to put this to the EU as part of the final Brexit negotiations. However, there will be no Northern Ireland Executive in the near or foreseeable future! I believe that those who are pro-Brexit gambled with the stability and future of Northern Ireland and recent events are a similar gamble.

The situation has become petty. This pettiness is particularly evident in the withdrawal of funding for an Irish language scheme. Even though that funding has now been reinstated, the damage has been done. This was a childish move that was insulting to all Irish speakers, not just those in the North, and to those who want to learn Irish. The current situation, with an election on the horizon, represents a failure on the part of the main parties and politicians in the North. If sense had prevailed, if there had been an atmosphere of mutual respect and if there had been an acceptance that the cash for ash scheme needed investigation in the best interests of the people of Northern Ireland, they would not be facing into an election now. This is particularly serious in the context of the uncertainty surrounding Brexit. The election is to be held on 2 March which leaves a very short timeframe before Brexit is triggered. In the meantime, it will be the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Mr. James Brokenshire, who will be looking after Northern Ireland’s interests instead of those who were directly elected by the people of the North. This is a real cause for concern because the majority in Northern Ireland voted to remain in the EU although the majority in Britain voted to leave. It is very concerning that it is not the elected members of the Northern Ireland Assembly who will deal with these issues. Furthermore, there is no guarantee that after the elections there will be a functioning government in Northern Ireland. The comments of some Northern politicians speak in the media last night do not augur well for the formation, by mid-March, of a fully functioning government that can work in the best interests of the people of Northern Ireland.

Is maith liom an seanfhocal “ní neart go cur le chéile”. Tá sé soiléir nach raibh an seanfhocal sin i gceist ag na daoine sa Tuaisceart, go háirithe na polaiteoirí, nach raibh ag “cur le chéile”.

It is obvious that there has not been the level of working together that is vital for Northern Ireland and especially for the full implementation of the Good Friday Agreement. This can be seen from the number of issues that have been outstanding for many years since the signing of that Agreement. Regardless of whether one agrees with the terms of the Agreement, it is a binding accord, signed in April 1998 and approved in referenda in Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, by 71% and 94% respectively. There was a record turnout in the North for the referendum.

It is rather ironic that the North is facing into an election because of an issue that is not obviously or glaringly sectarian as was the case in the past. The election has been caused by an economic issue, the cash for ash scheme, that said, there is a sectarian aspect to the issue which is really astonishing because one would have thought that everybody would be on the same page with regard to public funds and the importance of transparency and value for money. One would have thought that all individuals and parties would agree on such criteria, regardless of whether they are Unionist, nationalist, capitalist or socialist. The scandal led to the deputy First Minister’s resignation and the calling of an election, both of which were avoidable if the parties and individuals had been working together for the common good and were focused on the principle of the best use of public funds.

The renewable heat incentive, RHI, scheme was positive in the sense that its aim was to encourage businesses and farmers to switch from fossil fuel to biomass heating systems. However, the subsidies provided under the scheme were extremely generous and had no limits. The scheme has been dubbed “cash for ash” because the more fuel that scheme participants burn, the more they earn. We know, thanks to information provided by a whistleblower, that the scheme has been and is being abused. The latest information in that regard has been provided by the Northern Ireland Audit Office which estimates that over the next 20 years there will be an overspend of £400 million or more on the scheme. Who is paying for this? The answer is the Northern Ireland Executive and the taxpayers. The turmoil has resulted from the fact that the former First Minister, Ms Arlene Foster, was the responsible Minister when the scheme was introduced. While there are departmental officials who must be held to account, ultimately responsibility lies with the Minister. There are questions arising with regard to the whistleblower, why it took the Department so long to realise the seriousness of the issue and the legal implications of the scheme. All of these questions could have been answered by an investigation. Such an investigation was needed and the former First Minister should have stood aside while it took place. It is quite incredible that Ms Foster could not have done that and spared the North a second election in the space of a year. More importantly, such an investigation could have gotten to the crux of the scheme, determined what could be done to address the problems with it and ensured that the cost to the taxpayer would be limited.

I am a member of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on the Implementation of the Good Friday Agreement. That committee has had quite a number of meetings since the Brexit vote with various groups, all of whom have expressed concern, if not consternation, at the difficulties they are facing because of the outcome of the referendum.

– Last week, the committee discussed some of the very practical concerns of farmers in the North. The committee was told that farms in the Republic will be €20,000 better off than their similar-sized counterparts in the North.
– There is concern about the possible adverse effects of a hard Brexit, including an increase in smuggling.
– The committee also heard about the Geopark cross-Border project in south Fermanagh which is dependent on EU funding.
– There are many more examples of such projects and participants are very concerned about the future.

Another concern discussed by the committee last week was that at different stages Prime Minister May and others in her Government called for the UK’s withdrawal from the European Convention on Human Rights. This convention is so important for peace and stability. The Children’s Rights Alliance was very clear when it met us last week that this should be non-negotiable and that the convention and human rights instruments in the Good Friday Agreement would not be a casualty of Brexit. It also has concerns about child protection, children’s rights and the issue of child abduction and the implications regarding the common travel area. I know the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs, Deputy Zappone, has a conference coming up at the end of the month on these issues.

We also have legacy issues. We have had the third all-party Dáil motion on the Dublin and Monaghan bombings but there are still outstanding issues and families are still waiting, more than 40 years on. There is constant stalling on this! The Lord Chief Justice of Northern Ireland’s proposal to establish a legacy unit to process 56 outstanding legacy inquests relating to the Troubles received support from victims and survivors, but there was a delay with the funding, and this was before the events yesterday. The report to the UN of its special rapporteur on the promotion of truth, justice, reparation and guarantees of non-recurrence included a series of recommendations on the implementation of the Stormont House Agreement and on the bill of rights for Northern Ireland but we see more delays now. There are continuing and continuous issues regarding prisoners and the revocation of licences, and a significant lack of progress in ensuring justice and due process.

Syria & Europe’s weak voice at the UN
When it comes to Syria, language fails to describe what is happening there. I do not think we have the language that could convey the depth of the suffering, devastation and anguish of Syrian people. In a way, it is a war that has nothing to do with the ordinary people of Syria. The way in which it has developed has left ordinary people behind. Many years ago, I too had the opportunity to visit Damascus, which is a very rich, cultural and diverse city. When we think about the history of Syria, it is considered the cradle of civilisation. Again, there is a richness of culture and diversity. When we see what has happened in Syria, it is as though it has been taken over by politics and a power play between a number of forces backing one side or another, whether it is Shi’ite, Sunni or some other force.

There are many powers, such Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Russia, the United States and countries in Europe, that are involved in this civil war. It has come a very long way from that initial very peaceful protest in the name of democracy. It is obvious that there has been no interest in a political solution. A military solution was on the agenda to see who could bomb who out quicker. We think particularly of the trauma endured by children. All the countries involved sit at the United Nations. It raises very serious questions around the efficiency and effectiveness of the UN. Europe is also at the UN. However, it is as though we have now come to accept the unacceptable. I believe that Europe’s voice at the UN must be stronger in its relationships with those countries with whom it has business and diplomatic relations. At the very least, there must be a strong voice for the protection of civilians and combatants, for the respecting of the rules of war, for safe passage, and for free and safe access to all areas for UN staff.

Cuban Relations And Banking
I acknowledge our Government’s opening political dialogue with Cuba. If we have not done so already, Ireland is about to sign the EU-Cuba political dialogue and co-operation agreement. I believe it is positive for both Ireland and Cuba. We have a special relationship with Cuba, its society and its economy. Hopefully, we will have more positive trade relations between the EU and Cuba, including Ireland. EU support is vital in order that the progress made by President Obama and President Raúl Castro, with a major role played by Pope Francis, is not undermined or undone. I believe that the EU’s voice was not strong enough on the banking issues of Cuba.

Catalonia & Lack Of Democracy
I share the concerns of the speaker of the parliament of Catalonia, Ms Carme Forcadell, who was summoned to court this Friday for allegedly disobeying and perverting the course of justice by allowing the pro-independence roadmap to be put to a vote last July. This is a serious undermining of democracy. At EU level, I ask that Ireland express concerns over the prosecution of Ms Forcadell.

Guatemala & The Murder Of Jeremy Barrios Lima
The EU and EU countries that have diplomatic relations with countries that are not respectful of human rights or in which there are human rights abuses should use all avenues in their power to address these issues. I refer in particular to the murder on 12 November last of an environmental and human rights defender, Mr. Jeremy Barrios Lima, in Guatemala City. He had worked with Trócaire’s partner organisation, CALAS. It is a very dangerous environment in these countries to be a human rights defender and to look after and try to protect the indigenous people and their right to land. Some of these land grabs are being carried out by corporations and multi-nationals who have bases in Europe. Europe could be a stronger voice in promoting human rights.

You can watch my speech in full here:

In recent years, we have been subjected to horrendous budgets. It is all very well talking about debt and the country being in a bad place, the IMF, etc. The measures taken were hard hitting, but they were disproportionate. Those with the least suffered the most and those, who were more able to take the cuts, were not affected proportionately.

Recent events in Dublin Central and the north inner city have certainly shown the cumulative effect of those cuts. We know the effect of 30% cuts on our community, youth services and other projects. It contributed to further social exclusion, deprivation and hardship.

I listened to the Ministers’ speeches and they outlined very fine principles – to build a fair and just society, that the benefits of our economic recovery would be felt by all and that it would make life better for all, but especially for the most vulnerable in our society. Nobody could disagree with those aims. However, will the measures announced today achieve those aims? We need a mechanism for constant monitoring and evaluation of the measures to see if they are making a difference and if not there should be a change and a readjustment.

Equality Proofing
This brings me to a general point. We know that budgets are rooted in economics and politics. However, ordinary people can get lost in the statistics and figures – the GDPs and the GNIs. There is always a need for equality proofing and the social impact analysis in that economic debate to ensure that budget measures make a difference to those who are most in need.

We know that budgets are political. Whether one is in government or in opposition, there will always be an eye on the next election.

This budget does appear to be more of a collaborative effort. It had to be. Perhaps we will see an extension of that collaborative approach, working through a consensus and compromise, which we can develop further with the new independent budget committee. We could get to a point where the committees will have a more progressive and active role in determining budgets and allocations.

As well as the budgets being in the political and economic arenas, we also need to have a philosophical input. That has to do with quality of life and how budgets contribute, not take from, the quality of life of citizens. Surely the common good, and improving the quality of life for everyone, has to be central. Mr.Ban Ki-moon has said, “There is one word above all that must guide us on this road map to ending poverty, transforming lives and protecting the planet. That word is dignity.” I look at today’s budget and ask how much is it contributing to the dignity of all citizens, especially those who are living in poverty, living with a disability or a mental health issue, those in homeless accommodation or who are sleeping on the streets, Travellers, our new communities, those coping with an addiction or in recovery from addiction and trying to stay in recovery? How will the budget add to the dignity of our prisoners and those coming out of prison? Next Monday is the UN day for the eradication of poverty. How much will this budget contribute to eradicating poverty? Again, constant monitoring is vital.

There are positives in this. I hear the “Late Late Show” cliché being used about this budget, but there is a danger that if resources are spread too thinly there will be negligible impact.

Housing
The year before last the budget announced a package of €2.2 billion for this area. Last year it was €500 million. What happened in the meantime? The situation did not improve and we know the increasing numbers, especially in Dublin, of people who are homeless, who are in negative equity and people who are being evicted. There are positive gains but sometimes it has been one step forward and three back. We hear the frustrations of people every day – lone parents and families on housing lists who are being told they are placed at 400 or 900 or so on that list. This time next year, will I be standing here and saying that today’s budget did make a difference? I see the student accommodation developments in Dublin, which we know is needed. The idea is that it will reduce the numbers in private rented accommodation, which is positive. I do not, however, see the same urgency in building social housing as I see in the building of student accommodation. The great aim of the help to buy scheme is to assist first-time buyers in putting together a deposit for a mortgage but there is a strong likelihood that this scheme, far from being progressive, will result in house prices increasing. The property market has the element of the sacred cow about it; there can be no controls. Will the tax relief in respect of the home renovation incentive scheme be applied to tenants in local authority housing who have the space on which to build? It would help to alleviate overcrowding because there are tenants who are willing to co-operate with their local authority and contribute with finance. Excessive and exorbitant rent is hindering the first-time buyer. If rent was reasonable and if there were controls in rent then those people would be in a better position to build up a deposit. Will the draft amendments to section 110 of the Taxes Consolidation Act 1997 relating to companies and other special purpose vehicle-type arrangement clip the activities of the vulture funds?

Social Welfare for elderly and those with a disability
The €5 increase in social welfare payments is positive, but we have to be sure we are not giving €5 with one hand and taking it back with the other in the form of further stealth taxes and increases in the cost of living. In Dublin I know the particular hardship of the prescription charges, especially for elderly people. I welcome the reduction for the over 70s, but it needs to be extended to people with disabilities. What is the budget contributing in making a positive difference to those people living with a disability? They have additional costs of living because of their disability, but this is not being recognised. Prescription pricing charges have increased by 500% since it was introduced in 2010. Advocacy groups point out that a single person, under 70 years of age, with a disability will only get a medical card if earnings are less than €184 per week, whereas a single person who is over 70 can have a means of up to €500 per week and be eligible for a medical card. I believe everybody over the age of 70 years should have a medical card but surely it is time for those who have disability to be given a medical card. It has been a disappointing budget for those with a disability. The Disability Federation of Ireland has stated it is disappointed that while there was a real opportunity for a focused impact with funding for people with disability, it was not taken.

Smokers
With regard to the cigarettes increase of 37 cent, it is unfortunate that the views of the group Retailers Against Smuggling were not considered. The group has pointed out that the illicit trade in tobacco is €1.2 billion in the past five years. In the first six months of 2016 the tobacco products seized by Revenue led to a loss of over €15.8 million to the Exchequer, an increase on the figure for the previous period. There is a growing black market, it is on the increase and an increase in the price of cigarettes will further grow that black market. The Retailers Against Smuggling had asked for a moratorium on further increases until there was more research done on the subject. A packet of cigarettes is now €11. On the black market a packet would be €4 or maybe €5. We have anti-smuggling rules, but they need to be strengthened. This price increase is not going to put off smokers but it is going to have more of them turning to the black market.

Foreign Aid
I am glad to see the reference to overseas development assistance. It is quite a distance from our commitment to 0.7% of GDP. While there has been an increase, we are going down the percentage line and we have no indication of how we are going to move towards that 0.7% target. Ireland played a very strong role in sustainable development goals. The President and the Taoiseach were in New York representing Ireland at the UN summit, which adopted the goals, but we do not appear to have an Irish sustainable development strategy and a concrete implementation plan that would contribute towards co-ordinating the achievement. We know of poverty and exclusion in this state, but in the developing world we know how much worse it is. Philip Alston, UN special rapporteur, made an interesting point when he said there would be “little to be gained by providing assistance unless the structures of the society can be encouraged to develop in directions that can make [more] effective use of that aid.” One of those structures is tax. The Minister, Deputy Michael Noonan, said the 12.5% corporation tax rate would not be changed. What is our effective tax rate? With regard to our obligations internationally on tax justice, is our tax policy undermining the tax take of those less well-off countries? I welcome the closing of the double Irish loophole and the country by country reporting, but we have to ensure we do not facilitate multinational tax avoidance and that our tax and fiscal policies are grounded in principles of human rights.

Animal Welfare
As someone interested in animal welfare issues, when I heard the provision of €25 million for a new animal welfare scheme, I was delighted. I was waiting to hear that the funding was going to the animal welfare groups, those organisations that work on animal welfare issues and with animals we know are being ill-treated, injured and abused, such as greyhounds, hares, foxes, badgers or puppies. However, what is the €25 million for? It is for sheep. No disrespect to sheep, but during my involvement with animal welfare, we had no issues brought to our attention with regard to the abuse of sheep so I wonder who is actually benefitting from the €25 million. The Irish Council Against Blood Sports has stated that since 2001, the Government has handed over nearly €250 million to the greyhound industry, including €14.8 million in 2016, yet we know the abuses in this industry.
Tá an-díomá maidir leis an laghdú sa mhaoiniú don teanga Gaeilge. Dé Máirt seo chugainn, beidh cúpla uair a chloig againn sa Dáil agus beimid ag caint faoin nGaeilge agus an féiniúlacht chultúrtha. We will make fine speeches on that occasion on how important the Irish language is. At a time when demand is on the increase for gaelscoileanna there is a decrease of 9% in Irish language funding.

Child Care
I welcome what the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs, Deputy Katherine Zappone, is trying to do in child care, that it is of quality, more affordable and progressive, but there are concerns from stay-at-home parents and those who provide child care at home. They feel very hard done by with this measure. I am sure the Minister will take these issues on board.

What Are The Positives?
There are positives in the budget for those who start their own businesses, the self-employed, farmers and fishermen. There is the Christmas bonus. There are going to be additional teachers, gardaí and nurses, but we have to have the conditions in schools, hospitals and nursing homes in order that people will want to work in them. The HSE budget is up by 5%. I note the staffing hours will be increased for the community and addiction projects. Budgets have the ability to hurt or help the weak, the ill and the frail. It is only in time that we will see how much this budget is contributing in a positive or negative way.

Let us look at migration in a pragmatic way and examine whether, if the issues causing people to flee were addressed, people would want to stay in their country of origin. We know that what causes people to leave is conflict, human rights abuses and food insecurity (often caused by famine due to climate change). It’s not just Syria that they are fleeing from but a long list of countries in the developing world.

Last week we had World Refugee Day and we know from the UNHCR that some 60 million people have been displaced, with thousands of people fleeing their homes every day. I was struck by a quote from it yesterday which said, “The world commemorates the strength, courage and resilience of millions of refugees”. They are very fine words but the reality is suffering, hardship and terrible human rights abuses of those refugees.

The EU-Turkey deal on migration is appalling! What it means is that thousands of refugees, especially unaccompanied minors, will be living in unacceptable humanitarian conditions. So much so that the reputable organisation, Médecins sans Frontières, which has suffered so much itself, for example, when 22 of its personnel were killed in air strikes on its trauma centre in northern Afghanistan, that it refuses to take EU funding.

By being more proactive about food security and ensuring that economic partnership agreements have the interests of developing countries at heart, and not just the driver being European economic growth, we can ensure better sustainable livelihoods for people living in developing countries. If Europe is more proactive on human rights as well, that would play a significant part in people wanting to stay in their own countries. It would also ensure a massive impetus in terms of youth employability which is causing many problems in developing countries. People can have good lives in their own countries.

Food insecurity can also result from trade agreements, which brings me to the Economic Partnership Agreements, EPAs, on which we got a full 20 minute debate in this House! I had an opportunity to speak at the African, Caribbean and Pacific, ACP, group of states joint parliamentary assembly with the EU some weeks ago where I met a number of African parliamentarians. I was struck by two issues, first, the complete lack of knowledge of economic partnership agreements on the part of some of their parliamentarians. They never heard of them yet they are sitting in parliaments that are going to ratify the agreements. That is undermining European credibility that they expect that to happen. Second, I met other parliamentarians who were very knowledgeable about EP agreements and see positive aspects to them but they are also concerned that they will undermine sustainable livelihoods, increase food insecurity and the country’s ability to feed itself and then instead of lifting people out of poverty it will plunge them further into poverty, increased dependency on aid and increase migration.

The European Commission must listen to the concerns on Economic Partnership Agreements by national parliaments which have to ratify them. I hope the parliaments that do not ratify the EPAs do not face possible fines which is the European norm these days. European credibility is at stake and the European Council must rethink those matters.

I am struck by something President Higgins said recently about the European Union; he said it must, once again, come to represent a model of balance between market, society and the environment.