What this debate is about is the shameful decision of the Government to gut Senator Frances Black's occupied territories Bill by excluding services. It only took up a tiny fraction of the Minister's opening statement but everybody knows that is what this debate is about. It is about the Government's decision to ignore the unanimous position of the foreign affairs committee and this Dáil. It is about its decision to ignore the fact that Spain has implemented measures on services with no comeback and no legal action from the European Commission. It is about its decision to ignore the position and the decision of the International Court of Justice, which made no distinction between goods and services when it said that states must abstain from entering into economic or trade dealings with Israel concerning the occupied Palestinian territory. The Government has been scratching around for some sort of legal justification to hang this upon. What it has come up with is the idea that the public policy exemption only applies to goods. I do not think the Minister believes it. I do not think she has any legal authority to base it upon because I presume she heard the evidence of expert after expert and eminent lawyer after eminent lawyer in the foreign affairs committee who said, one after the other, that public policy also provides a derogation not only for the free movement of goods but also the freedom to provide services. However, everybody knows it is not about law. The Minister knows it is not about law. In 2018, in response to the original occupied territories Bill, the Minister said, "The first and essential reason [we cannot support it] is that the essential purpose of the Bill is contrary to EU law and requires the State to do something which is not in its power." The Minister said then that legally, we could not do goods or services - neither - but European law has not changed an iota since then. The European law in relation to trade is the same. What has changed is politics. What has changed is that the Minister is under pressure on this issue. It is all about politics. The Attorney General said it was about politics. In the leaked advice, the Attorney General said that the decision to replace the occupied territories Bill is "a political choice". What is the political choice? It is not to annoy Donald Trump and the US Administration too much. That is the bottom line. We know that 90 minutes after the US ambassador wrote to Micheál Martin saying the US had concerns about this Bill, Micheál Martin said the Bill was going to be reviewed rather than progressed. I think it is disgraceful. It is utterly disgraceful to prioritise relations with Donald Trump and US imperialism over standing up against genocide and apartheid. Public pressure is going to come to bear over the coming weeks to insist that we, at the very least, have a Bill that includes goods and services.

Sentiment score: -0.05