Irish deputy premier to include services from Israeli settlements in trade ban
Simon Harris also said he wants to put pressure on the other 26 European countries to consider banning trade with occupied Palestinian territories, and called on opposition parties to contact their counterparts in the bloc.
Mr Harris said Ireland is the only country to publish legislation to ban imports from the occupied Palestinian territories, saying it is 'pretty lonely out there', adding it would be 'a hell of a lot better' if Europe moved together on it.
The legislation was approved by the Cabinet on Tuesday morning.
Mr Harris brought forward the renamed Israeli Settlements (Prohibition of Importation of Goods) Bill 2025.
The Government opted for fresh legislation instead of progressing the Occupied Territories Bill, first tabled in 2018.
It will now go before an Oireachtas committee for examination.
Mr Harris said that every Government TD will be expected to back the legislation as it forms part of the Programme for Government.
'Let's not forget one thing before we get into the detail of the legislation, there isn't another country in the European Union that you can visit today and ask a government minister about their Bill to ban trade and the detail of it, because they don't have one,' he added.
'We're the first country in the European Union to take this step. We're the first country in the European Union say, yes, trade is a European competency, and it'll be a hell of a lot better if Europe moves together, and a hell of a lot more impactful.
'But in the absence of Europe moving together, we're going to go ahead with our own domestic legislation.
'I would really ask the opposition here not to do this lazy politicking of you know, opposition good, government bad. Everybody in this country is sickened to the pit of their stomach with the genocide they see in Gaza.
'They don't care, the people of Ireland, who they vote for in an election in relation to this, they just know in their gut what is happening, particularly children in Gaza, is genocide is wrong, and everyone has to do everything they want.
'I have no policy difference, zero policy difference with the opposition in relation to the inclusion of services, but we do have a Constitution, we are members of the European Union, and I'm not in the business of putting together legislation that would fall at the first legal hurdle.
'I presume everybody here wants to pass a law that is impactful, a law that is in compliance with the laws of our land.'
Earlier this week, a number of countries, including Ireland, asked the European Commission to examine how goods produced in illegal Jewish settlements 'can be brought into line with international law'.
Mr Harris said he does not believe the European Union has made itself compliant with the ICJ advisory opinion.
'We will do our own legislation, (I am) open to services, absolutely open to working constructively with the opposition, but also keep the pressure on at the European level,' he added.
'What I hope the opposition will be doing today, every opposition leader should be picking up the telephone, and they should be ringing their counterparts in European countries and saying, 'hey, have you seen here in Ireland we're bringing forward a domestic legislation, would you think about doing it yourself?
'Because so far, it's pretty lonely out there. There's not one other country in Europe that has published any legislation to ban trade, and I'd really appreciate the opposition's help with their counterparts in the 26 other European states.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Spectator
27 minutes ago
- Spectator
For Trump, solving Ukraine won't be as easy as Iran
For the moment, at least, the world seems to be going Donald Trump's way. Instead of setting the Middle East ablaze, Trump's air strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities have been met by a single, casualty-free Iranian counterstrike on the US's al-Udeid Air Base in Qatar. And though Tehran described the attack as 'mighty and successful', it emerged that Iran had actually warned the Qatar authorities in advance of the strikes – a message that they immediately passed on to the Americans. At the Nato summit in the Hague this week, European leaders lined up to support Trump's demand that they 'pay their way' and boost their defence spending to 5 per cent of GDP. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen hailed the new defence bonanza as an opportunity to boost European innovation and announced a 'Rearm Europe' plan to mobilise €650 billion (£554 million) in defence investment. Every Nato member state (except for Spain) signed up to the new 5 per cent target – even though for most members that figure entails doubling, or in some cases tripling, defence budgets. Trump came to office promising to be a peacemaking president Nato's secretary-general Mark Rutte even sent Trump an effusive note praising his strikes on Iran. 'Mr President, dear Donald, Congratulations and thank you for your decisive action in Iran, that was truly extraordinary, and something no one else dared to do,' gushed Rutte in language apparently intended to mirror Trump's own bombastic tweeting style. 'Donald, you have driven us to a really, really important moment for America and Europe, and the world,' continued Rutte. It was not easy but we've got them all signed onto 5 per cent! You will achieve something NO American president in decades could get done. Europe is going to pay in a BIG way, as they should, and it will be your win. It was a very different reaction to the last time Trump addressed a Nato summit in London back in 2019. Then, a hot-mike moment caught Canadian prime minister Justin Trudeau, British premier Boris Johnson, French President Emmanuel Macron and – yes – Mark Rutte, then-Dutch prime minister sniggering over Trump's lateness. Trump was so incensed by the mockery that he flew home early, but not before blasting Trudeau as being 'two faced' and criticising him for failing to meet Nato's spending benchmark – then a mere 2 per cent of GDP. Remarkably, Trump's order to both Israel and Iran to cease fire after twelve days of massive bombardments seems to be holding. More impressive still is that both sides immediately began to violate the ceasefire but were immediately brought to heel by hard words from the White House. That leaves just one major fire on Trump's foreign policy horizon that's still burning: Ukraine. As he was campaigning for the presidency, Trump vowed that he would stop the conflict 'within 24 hours'. In practice, three months of intensive negotiations both by Trump envoys and by phone direct with Putin have yielded nothing but weasel words from the Kremlin. At the same time, the White House's relationship with the Ukrainians reached rock bottom after Volodymyr Zelensky's train wreck meeting with Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance in the Oval Office in February was followed by a freeze on US arms and funding to Kyiv. But the Nato summit seemed to yield some positive news for Ukraine, too. Trump was photographed, beaming, beside Macron and Zelensky – whom he described as 'a nice guy'. When a Ukrainian reporter asked Trump about the US providing air defence systems, the President asked her about where her husband was – and on learning that he was a soldier, he said, 'I wish you a lot of luck, I can see it's very upsetting to you.' He also promised to send 'some' Patriots to Kyiv, noting that the US needed them and so did Israel. But most significantly, Trump blocked Putin's attempt to pivot away from Ukraine by publicly squashing the Kremlin's offers to mediate between Washington and Iran. 'I've spoken to Putin. I said no, I don't need help on Iran,' Trump told reporters. 'Do me a favour, help with Russia.' Trump's hard words for Putin were a welcome sign to Ukrainians that the White House does retain some scepticism about Putin's hollow claims to be serious about peace. At the same time, though, Trump's team made it clear that they saw talks, not military aid, as the only solution to the conflict. '@POTUS has been abundantly clear the Russia-Ukraine war must end,' tweeted Secretary of State Marco Rubio. 'There is no military solution, only a diplomatic one.' But there were hopeful words for the Kremlin too. Rubio added that the US would not be imposing additional sanctions against Russia because if 'we come in and crush them with more sanctions, we probably lose our ability to talk to them about the ceasefire and then who's talking to them?' In the space of a few days, Trump went from bombing Iran to being bombed to a ceasefire, allowing all sides to claim victory. Trump also succeeded in not only persuading recalcitrant Europeans to massively increase their defence spending but also in making them enthusiastic about doing it. Vice President Vance also articulated what he called the 'brutally simple' Trump Doctrine: Define a clear American interest. Push hard through diplomacy. If that fails, strike fast, win quick, and get out – before it becomes another endless war. Trump came to office promising to be a peacemaking president. After three months in office, he's fought his first short, victorious war. But it will be achieving a lasting peace in Ukraine – and wrangling the notoriously stubborn and duplicitous Putin into a deal – that will be the Trump's true foreign policy test. This article was originally published in The Spectator's world edition.
Scotsman
an hour ago
- Scotsman
Why UK needs to pander to Trump but should not necessarily believe him
Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... Following the US attack on Iran, Donald Trump said its nuclear enrichment facilities had been 'completely and fully obliterated', setting back the tyrannical regime's plans by 'decades'. However, according to a leaked preliminary assessment by the Pentagon, the missile strikes only caused a delay of a few months. Amid the ensuing uproar over these very different takes, the US President attacked the media for reporting the classified document's findings, saying they were "scum" and "disgusting", while US Secretary of State Marco Rubio accused those behind the leak of being "professional stabbers". Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad But, clearly, what matters is what has actually happened. If Iran still has the ability to quickly develop nuclear weapons, the world needs to be alive to that threat. With the situation still unclear, it would be far better to err on the side of caution. Keir Starmer speaks to US President Donald Trump at the Nato summit in The Hague (Picture: Kin Cheung/pool) | Getty Images Axis of Autocracies Where Trump deserves credit is that the US attack has demonstrated to Iran's leaders how vulnerable they are, and this may have a deterring effect on a regime, widely despised by its own people, which poses a very real threat to world peace. It is a member of what former Nato Secretary-General, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, has described as the 'Axis of Autocracies', along with Russia, China and North Korea. The combined threat these dictatorships pose is the reason why the world needs a much stronger Nato. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad And that means European leaders must sometimes swallow their pride and be rather sycophantic towards Trump, even as he continues to cast doubt on his commitment to the Nato treaty which states an attack on one will be treated as an attack on all. The UK and Europe have no choice but to spend more on defence – commensurate with the increased threats facing the world and also, again erring on the side of caution, in case Trump decides to withdraw from the alliance, formally or not.
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
Plans for new nuclear reactors in Scotland brought forward
The plans and the plant owner's stance are revealed in the first part of our new series which is launched today with our sister title the East Lothian Courier. The GMB Scotland union has brought forward the sector estimates as it called on the Scottish Government to lift its moratorium on new nuclear. It has called for an 'urgent review the potential of new nuclear plants to cut emissions, secure energy supplies, and boost economic growth'. The union, one of the biggest across the energy sector, is urging ministers to lift the ban on new nuclear power in Scotland and convene an expert summit to discuss its potential to 'underpin the drive to Net Zero and create thousands of skilled, well-paid jobs and apprenticeships'. GMB Scotland said that industry-based research shows potential for two new large-scale reactors at Torness and direct station wages would equate to £90-100 million with £30-35m additional spending on contractors. However, the tension between Holyrood and Westminster is clear, with the UK Government pointing towards funding but adding that 'the Scottish Government continues to block any movement on this safe, green energy that would turbocharge the Scottish economy'. The Scottish Government stood firm and signalled research showing a potential 80,000 renewables jobs in Scotland within 25 years. EDF, the French state-owned energy giant and operator of Torness, told The Herald the site is suitable for new nuclear, but that it respects the Scottish Government stance and instead is concentrating on England. Torness is currently a significant site. Based on EDF's 2024 financial results, it generated more than a fifth of the UK's total nuclear output and more of its nuclear earnings in this country. It comes as the UK Government announced £14.2 billion for the creation of the Sizewell C plant south of the Border. The UK Government and EDF jointly own more than 80 per cent of the Suffolk site that will provide 10,000 jobs, including 1,500 apprenticeships. Ed Miliband, UK energy secretary, promised a 'new golden age' of nuclear power with the announcement. The news brought the new nuclear debate again to the fore as Torness moves towards its decommissioning. EDF said: 'If you consider the [Torness] site, in isolation from government policy, it would be suitable for new nuclear. There is available land, good road, rail and grid connections and it has a community which is used to hosting nuclear. 'However, we respect that the Scottish Government doesn't support new nuclear just now, so EDF is focussing its nuclear development ambitions on England and expanding its renewables business in Scotland.' The company manages eight UK nuclear power station sites and owns five of the eight designated new nuclear sites. Paul Forrest, Torness station director. (Image: Gordon Terris) The news is revealed as we examine the impact of the planned closure site near Dunbar which has around 500 staff and around 200 full-time contractors, the surrounding community and the region's economy as it moves towards shut-down. Paul Forrest, Torness station director, said it is 'a valuable asset to the UK' that has contributed more than £16bn to the economy since generation started in 1988. He said: 'Torness Power Station continues to play a significant role in EDF's UK operations. It is one of five generating stations and, based on 2024's financial results, generated 21.5% of the UK's total nuclear output and contributed 22.6%to the Ebitda (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortisation) of UK's Nuclear Operations business. 'In March 2025, Torness achieved a cumulative generation total of 300 terawatt-hours since its commissioning, that is enough to power every Scottish home for 36 years and solidified its status as Scotland's most productive low-carbon asset. 'Torness is a high performing site which has met its output targets for four out of the last five years and is on plan for this year.' READ MORE: Nuclear power wins vote of confidence as life of last Scottish plant extended He said that 'beyond that, it is a vital part of the East Lothian community', adding: 'Through construction and generation, thousands of local people have developed highly skilled, well-paid careers at the station. 'Generations of families have worked there, building their lives around the site, and the security that has brought has been a boon for the local economy.' Additionally, the company said, three further planned refuelling outages will bring in an extra 800 workers 'who come to the site spending money in hotels, restaurants, take-aways and with taxi firms while they stay here' each time. The 2030 decommissioning will happen in stages with the removal of spent fuel from the reactors taking about four years and will be carried out by EDF, which, at its other decommissioning facility at Hunterston B in Ayrshire, now at the defueled stage, employs around 250 moving forward to 'nuclear restoration services'. At this point it will take around 15 years to remove all the buildings from site, with the exception of the reactor building. It will be left in situ, in a state called 'safestore', for around 70 years, until the final clearance of square-mile site. The firm said it does not have 'visibility of figures that would allow us to make an assessment of whether renewables projects in the area will create those long-term employment opportunities on a like-for-like basis'. However, Mr Forrest said: 'There will be a range of retraining opportunities as the station moves beyond generation and we will use the experience from other defueling sites to support staff. 'For example, at Hunterston B people have been trained to take on project management roles, which the station needs more of now. People have also been supported to gain additional qualifications in HGV driving or electrical skills which are needed on site during defueling but can also be used to build a career outside of the nuclear industry. 'Now Hunterston B is getting ready to transfer to nuclear restoration services there are further opportunities for retraining to take on jobs the station will need during decommissioning like health physicists and waste technicians. We expect to see the same kinds of opportunities at Torness when it reaches this stage.' The new Sizewell C site in Suffolk. (Image: EDF) The latest Economic Impact of the Civil Nuclear Industry report, compiled by Oxford Economics and commissioned by the Nuclear Industry Association, shows the sector generated an extra £350m for the Scottish economy in gross value added (GVA) in 2024, up from £1.1bn in 2021, a 32 per cent rise, and much it from south of the Border. It reported: 'Scottish workers are playing a vital role in building the new nuclear power station at Hinkley Point C in Somerset and 170 Scottish firms have contracts to work on the new power station with over £280m spent with Scottish firms to date.' Tom Greatrex, chief executive of the NIA, said: 'Scotland is benefiting from the jobs and growth coming with new nuclear plants being built in England, but with no new nuclear of its own, Scotland will lose out on billions in investment and thousands of well-paid, skilled jobs. 'Scots have always been a significant part of the nuclear industry – with renowned engineers and physicists coming through the Scottish education system, but despite the integral role nuclear plays in keeping electricity in Scotland green, without future plants young Scots will lose out on those opportunities at home.' READ MORE: It said: 'We are promoting and exploring the potential of Scotland's renewable energy resource and its ability to meet our local and national heat, transport and electricity needs, while also contributing to meeting our ambitious emission reduction targets. 'By 2030 we aim to generate the equivalent of 50% of Scotland's overall energy consumption from renewable sources, and by 2050 we aim to have decarbonised our energy system almost completely.' It said it is backing the development of the hydrogen sector and carbon capture and storage, promoting the development of on and offshore wind, marine energy, geothermal energy, hydropower and hydrogen. A UK Government spokesperson said: 'Investing in nuclear power represents energy security and a gateway to thousands of skilled jobs. 'It would bring millions of pounds in wages and economic growth to communities all over Scotland. The Scottish Government continues to block any movement on this safe, green energy that would turbocharge the Scottish economy. As long as they maintain that position jobs and investment that could be coming to Scotland will head elsewhere." Gillian Martin, Scottish energy secretary, told The Herald: 'The Scottish Government is focussed on supporting growth and creating jobs by capitalising on Scotland's immense renewable energy capacity rather than expensive new nuclear energy which takes decades to build, creates toxic waste which is difficult and costly to dispose of. 'However, we recognise the significant value that Torness and its workforce has contributed to Scotland's economy and local community. 'Decommissioning Scotland's nuclear sites will take decades and will require the retention of a highly skilled workforce. Meanwhile, the significant growth in renewables, storage hydrogen, carbon capture and decommissioning are key opportunities for our future energy workforce in Scotland – with independent scenarios from Ernst and Young, showing that with the right support, Scotland's low carbon and renewable energy sector could support nearly 80,000 jobs by 2050.'
