I have rejected that point on a number of occasions. I have to reject the idea that I personally will be deciding on these things. If a government is to decide to sign up to an international agreement of this nature, it will have to make a decision. The Dáil, under a very specific constitutional provision, also has to make the decision. That is an opportunity for the Dáil to decide yea or nay. The impression given by this debate on the legislation is that, somehow, it gives a carte blanche to the Government. It doe…

There is no fast-track process.

What is happening here is that the Government, and the previous Government, very clearly wanted to have the Dáil ratify the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement and other trade agreements. A challenge was brought through the courts. The court said it was not possible under the current provisions, but it also said that if the Government wishes to do it, then, under its prerogative and the Dáil's prerogative, this is a way it could be done that would be constitutional. That is all we are doing here. There needs…

I was pretty robust with everybody who spoke in the previous debate. I robustly defended my own position and tried to get the correct information out. I will be robust with Sinn Féin now because, quite frankly, it is hard to take seriously its amendment to insert subsection (3C), which states, "materially compromise the State’s obligation ... to give effect to European Union law (including the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms) and to preserve its coherence and integrity". Every time there has been a refer…

That is what it is about.

There are a number of points to be made. Again, I cannot go any further on the right to regulate. I have quoted it to almost everybody and there have been statements made by Supreme Court judges on it. Again, there are cases being quoted by Senators that do not relate to the type of system under CETA. There was a German case to which Senator Higgins referred on the issue of tax collection. The CETA tribunal will not be allowed to make such an order. It does not even arise. It does not even relate to the legislation…

I cannot put the matter any further. The amendments are trying to tie the hands of the High Court. We are trying to give the High Court discretion. The items the Senator mentioned are not within the constitutional order of the State or the legal order of the EU. I do not believe it would be helpful to start expanding on what Mr. Justice Hogan said in his decision in the Costello case. We have examined that decision and drafted the legislation in accordance with it in order that it would be appropriate for the High …

I am not sure if I heard the question correctly but I believe the Senator asked me how the High Court makes findings. That is not a question for the Oireachtas to decide.

We cannot start to be prescriptive about what the High Court will or will not find. We are giving it guidance, through legislation, based on what the Supreme Court has said. The term "constitutional order" has been referenced by Irish courts in a number of cases. It would be a matter for determination in the ordinary manner by the High Court, and of course the Supreme Court if necessary, in any cases regarding the enforcement of awards in the State under the new Article 25A of the 2010 Act. It is not for the Execut…

Essentially, the Senator is trying to make the case that a CETA tribunal is going to make a decision that fundamentally affects how public policy is made in this country and I am telling her that is not possible. What we are doing is simply amending the Arbitration Act to allow us to ratify CETA. Ultimately, and quite honestly, we do not share the Senator's view. We have considered this very carefully from a legal position. We do not share her view or her concerns about how the Irish courts would interpret the new …

With regard to amendment No. 13, CETA includes commitments to co-operate on trade-related environmental issues of common concern, such as climate change. In fact, in this agreement between the European Union, its member states and Canada, everybody has agreed not to lower levels of environmental protection to encourage trade or investment. That has been agreed between the parties. In any event, there is absolutely no question of the State not meeting its obligations under the agreements referenced in the amendment …

There are commitments in CETA with regard to trade-related environmental issues of common interest, such as climate change.

It is just not credible to come into the Seanad and say that, while we know there is an agreement between Canada, the EU and its member states not to reduce the level of environmental protection, these big bad old corporations are going to be able to use little loopholes here and there to force all of those who came to this agreement to do what they do not want to do. It is suggested that sovereign states will be forced to do what they do not want to do and what they all agreed not to do as a fundamental part of th…

The agreement itself says that states are not going to reduce the level of environmental protection to facilitate trade and investment. I cannot continue to make that point. There has to be some realism to this debate. We keep hearing references to cases and I keep saying that this is a new system that is designed to address some of those concerns. Again, it comes back to the fundamental point that the certainty the trade agreement with Canada has offered, the reduction in tariffs and the openness to trade have gen…

A great deal is sold abroad. This is a general point about trade agreements. We must continue to support them. The interpretations that have been offered here in the Seanad are simply not the reality.

Again, I have to go back to the joint interpretative instrument on the environment, which states: CETA commits the European Union and its Member States and Canada to provide for and encourage high levels of environmental protection, as well as to strive to continue to improve such laws and policies and their underlying levels of protection. CETA explicitly recognises the right of Canada and of the European Union and its Member States, to set their own environmental priorities, to establish their own levels of envir…

They cannot handle the truth. That is the reality. They cannot handle the truth.

I have said it before and I will say it again-----

The fundamental difference between the position of the broad thrust of the Opposition and that of the Government is that the Opposition has no regard for the European Union, for trade agreements-----

I am not derailing it because we have another two hours of debate.