Israeli Settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (Prohibition of Importation of Goods) Bill 2026: Committee and Remaining Stages Seanad Éireann — 2026-07-15 ============================================================ Alice-Mary Higgins (IND), National University of Ireland The issues have been spelled out well by others and I will not reiterate them. I do not believe it is an intentional consequence but it is an example of how the tools need consideration. The failure to make proper distinctions in this is somewhat reminiscent of the issue relating to Morocco and Western Sahara, where the European Commission's measures that were supposedly for the population of Western Sahara ended up indirectly benefiting settlers. We have a kind of reversal of that now, where measures intended to target goods from settlements and settlers may indirectly target Palestinians. We should bear in mind this is not really the core purpose of the Bill. It is not around a particular good; it is around what the purchase of the good facilitates. The key purpose of the Bill is to take steps to prevent trade relations that contribute to the maintenance of Israeli settlements in the illegally occupied territories. We need to keep that in mind. It is not about targeting the geographic origin of goods. The actual purpose is explicitly in relation to settlements. You could argue that targeting the goods of Palestinians in those territories could compound the situation by narrowing the market for them. It is almost working against the purpose of the Bill. I will not expand further on that, as others have done so. I will speak to two other amendments I have in this grouping. One of them tackles a number of issues and may be a way to address this. It is an amendment in respect of the postcode system. It asks that there would be a review. This is amendment No. 17. It asks for a review and a report on postal codes and whether they are working as an appropriate mechanism for delivering on the purpose of the Bill. Within six months, there would be an examination of the extent to which the EU postal codes accurately capture illegal Israeli settlements. I say this in a number of contexts. One is the astonishing - perhaps it is not astonishing given the signals the world has sent Israel - and shocking expansion of Israeli settlements, including expansion into territories where there have never been settlements before and zones, such as the EEZ, which are core to the possibility of a two-state solution. The expansion of settlements needs to be monitored. There is also the question of potential future settlements in Gaza. I would like to be clear. Will we be waiting for the EU to assign postcodes in respect of settlements in Gaza? How will we be tackling the core issue of illegal settlements and illegal occupation in Gaza? These are issues that need to be monitored along with those that have been highlighted by others. Even if the Minister cannot accept the amendment, I suggest she commit to report on this anyway so that we can be confident as to how this mechanism is working out and that illegal Israeli settlements on occupied Palestinian land are not traded with, having failed to be brought into the net of this Bill because of a technicality of the European postcode documentation. I will highlight another matter because I am concerned that the postcode mechanism may prove inadequate in the ways I have signalled. The intent is clearly there. I am speaking purely about the effective operation of the provisions of the Minister's Bill. In amendment No. 4, I have suggested that, in addition to the question of the postcodes set out by the customs union, the phrase "corresponds to an illegal Israeli settlement in an occupied territory" be included. I have worded that in a particular way, and not only because I think it could address those issues of illegal Israeli settlements in occupied territories that have not been captured by the European Union's postcode system as a result of expansion in the West Bank or the appalling carve-up we are seeing in Gaza at the moment. It was disappointing to see Ursula von der Leyen tweeting about a meeting she attended about reconstruction plans in which Jared Kushner took part via a phone call. There are people involved who have been absolutely clear on their plans for the colonial exploitation as Gaza. They have been as transparent as they can be. I have worded the amendment in that context but also because we sadly need to recognise the fact that Israel has not limited its interest in illegal occupation to the occupied Palestinian territories. Israel is currently illegally occupying large parts of Syria. It has stated that it intends to stay there for an unlimited time. These parts of Syria contain towns. Just like individuals in occupied Palestine, individuals in these towns are now effectively subject to Israeli occupation. I am referring to towns like Abdin. I could list many other towns. Israel has also been very clear about its intention not to withdraw from southern Lebanon. The minister, Israel Katz, has spoken about this. It has been clear that the 200,000 people it has displaced will not be allowed to return. That is what its minister is saying. On the 1.2 million displaced in Lebanon, Israel has been clear on its absolute intention to occupy Lebanon as far as the Litani river and to demolish the towns and villages in those areas of occupation. That is why I am suggesting that it might be worth slightly expanding the frame in order to capture illegal Israeli settlements in any occupied territories. These are important questions and the same principles and points of international law must apply. We must not be in any way complicit in colonial expansion and exploitation by the Israeli state and the breaches of human rights that accompany them. I ask the Minister to give strong consideration to these amendments. If she cannot accept them at this point, I would like an indication of how she intends to tackle these issues. --- 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/2026-07-15/debate/main Retrieved: 2026-08-27T06:52:16+00:00 Sitting date: 2026-07-15