Arbitration (Amendment) Bill 2025: Committee Stage Seanad Éireann — 2026-05-20 ============================================================ Laura Harmon (LAB), Industrial and Commercial Panel I thank the Cathaoirleach. It is important to welcome the Cork guests in the Gallery, and Deputy McGrath. I welcome the Minister of State. I want to state unequivocally that I am opposed to this legislation. The Labour Party is opposed to this Bill. As has been mentioned, a number of our amendments have been ruled out of order. We got notification of that quite late. It is important to have it read into the record later as to why those amendments were ruled out of order. We are well aware of how important good trading relationships are for Ireland at the moment and in the future. Certainly, the Labour Party is a pro-trade party. This is not about being anti-trade. In regard to Canada, for example, we have good trading relationships already. The trade deal has been operating for several years without these courts. In that time there has been a 98% increase in trade between Ireland and Canada. Canadian-Irish relationships are extremely important. I have a sister living in Canada and had the pleasure of visiting there last year. It is important that we keep these relationships intact and build on them. However, this Bill has nothing to do with that. We are opposed to the Bill because it exposes Ireland to needless risks through the investor court system. Who is this Bill for? Who has been lobbying for the Bill? The correspondence I have received from ordinary members of the Irish public, ordinary Irish citizens, has been completely opposed to this Bill. Where, then, is the lobbying coming from in relation to this? Where is the pressure coming from? Is it just big business that is lobbying for this? Where is the need for it coming from? I think there is a lack of awareness around it among the public as regards the risks it poses, not just for the present, but for the future in terms of how it could affect our country on a number of different issues, including the environment, the economy, our rights and political decision-making. I want to speak to section 2, which I am opposing. Section 2 inserts a numbered reference to the new section 25A, which will be inserted into the Arbitration Act 2010 under section 4 of this Bill. We are opposed to all sections of the Bill and have tabled separate amendments to oppose that section also. That new section 25A provides that awards made pursuant to CETA and the EU-Chile Advanced Framework Agreement will be enforceable in Ireland in the same manner as a judgment or an order of the High Court. From a Labour Party perspective, we have been clear throughout the passage of this Bill through the Oireachtas that we are opposed to trade agreements that include investment court systems and the potential to undermine social and environmental regulations. We recognise the importance of an outward-looking Ireland trading with the world, particularly in the midst of global uncertainty. As we have seen in recent years, and in the face of tariffs, war and other disruption, trade agreements with the wider world are important, but we need to recognise the fact that CETA has been successfully implemented on a provisional basis for years now without the investor courts, which are a one-way system, in that states cannot sue companies in investor-state arbitrations. The first question is why EU and Canadian investors would not trust their own local courts. That is a very important question to ask. There is simply no reason to have such protection in jurisdictions with mature legal systems. We have discussed this at length during the Bill's passage. We know from experience that investor-state claims have the effect of inhibiting the ability of domestic governments to pass legislation addressing public concerns such as health, environmental protection, labour rights and human rights. Examples were cited earlier. We saw in Canada in 2013 Lone Pine Resources filing a damages claim worth 250 million Canadian dollars, or €161 million, under NAFTA against Canada over Quebec's moratorium on fracking. Investor-state claims have a regulatory chilling effect on governments, leaving them hamstrung. That is why we are opposed to the idea at the heart of this Bill that there is a need for these investor courts in a trade agreement between two mature democracies. Why is there any need to legislate for them here? I want to speak to a number of points about some of the amendments that were ruled out of order, just for the record. I know latitude was allowed for this, as the Leas-Chathaoirleach stated previously. In relation to amendment No. 1, which we tabled, what the Government is seeking to do is simply unnecessary. We have made the point again and again. CETA has been in operation for several years now. Canada-Ireland trade has nearly doubled since the introduction of CETA in 2017. Canadian foreign direct investment in Ireland is up by 131% since 2016, while Irish investment in Canada has also risen by 31%, so the agreement is working already. There is no need for investor courts. All they will achieve is to expose our country to risks and chill moves towards sensible regulation in both countries. Whom will this benefit? What benefit will this actually bring to the Irish people? I see this as having far more risks than it does public good for Ireland. We need to guard against any showboating when Irish politicians meet our fellow political representatives in Canada. This is not about trying to be the best girls or boys in the class for five minutes and then putting the Irish people at risk for decades and generations to come. This is really about long-term guarding against risk and protecting human rights, labour rights, environmental rights, health and our ability as public representatives to make decisions without fear or favour in relation to big businesses that may be seeking to sue in their own interests. We are therefore opposed to the Bill. Certainly from the Labour Party perspective, we are opposed to this. We have opposed it in the Dáil and will continue to oppose it in the Seanad. --- Source: Houses of the Oireachtas. Licensed under CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). The Official Report is revised after first publication; the fetch timestamp below identifies the version quoted. Record URI: https://data.oireachtas.ie/akn/ie/debateRecord/seanad/2026-05-20/debate/main Retrieved: 2026-08-14T04:54:58+00:00 Sitting date: 2026-05-20