I attended a meeting of the European Council on 23 and 24 March in Brussels. The agenda covered Ukraine; competitiveness; the Single Market and the economy; energy; and external relations. In his contribution to today’s debate, the Minister of State, Deputy Peter Burke, will provide further detail on some of the external relations issues discussed, including Serbia-Kosovo relations, the ongoing impact of the terrible earthquakes in Türkiye and Syria in February, and the external aspects of migration. I will cover all other issues.

In advance of our meeting, members of the European Council met with United Nations Secretary General António Guterres. In our meeting with him, we discussed the impact on global food security of the Russian blockade of Ukrainian ports. We also discussed climate action and the need to restore momentum towards achieving the sustainable development goals. The European Council was joined by video for part of our meeting by the President of Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelenskyy. We reiterated our unwavering support for his country. In particular, we called for accountability for the perpetrators, a stop to Russian aggression, respect for international humanitarian law, with particular regard to prisoners of war, and the safe return of Ukrainian children removed to Russia illegally, which is one of the most appalling aspects of the war. To think that children could be taken from their parents, deported to Russia and trained to become Russian is shocking. We also condemned the role being played by Belarus and Iran in supporting the war. We also discussed our ongoing political, military, humanitarian and financial support for Ukraine. The European Council invited the European Commission to present a support package to Moldova, one of the countries most directly and adversely impacted by Russia's war, ahead of its next meeting.

At our meeting last month, we returned to economic issues, picking up on our discussion in early February. Our particular focus on this occasion was on ensuring the EU's long-term competitiveness and the further deepening of the Single Market. There was broad welcome for the two significant proposals produced by the Commission on 16 March, namely, the Single Market at 30 and long-term competitiveness of the EU looking beyond 2030. The Commission has rightly identified that a further reduction of barriers, especially for services, is essential for the Single Market to remain the primary driver of the EU's competitiveness and growth. For this to happen there needs to be a renewed focus on enforcing existing Single Market rules, including benchmarking deficits in transposition of laws and in implementation, and on removing unjustified trade barriers in the services sector markets with the greatest integration potential. These include retail, construction, tourism, business services and renewable energy.

The Commission has also identified nine mutually reinforcing factors that can increase investment. These include access to capital; public investment; research and innovation; energy; circularity; digitalisation; education and skills; and trade. I particularly welcome the Commission's focus on better regulation, including the need for regular assessment of the stock of EU legislation, including its cumulative impact, rationalisation of reporting requirements and ensuring an overall approach to market rules and standards that is innovation friendly. Ahead of the meeting, I co-signed a letter to President Michel with ten like-minded member states calling for a long-term strategy to strengthen Europe’s competitiveness and global influence.

Shorter-term measures being advanced under the green deal industrial plan are important but Europe’s long-term strategy for future prosperity must be based on our economic strengths and on ensuring the right market conditions exist for investment and entrepreneurship in the decades ahead. This includes stronger mobilisation of public and private resources through the European research and innovation system, aligned with deeper capital markets to finance the fast-growing firms at the technological frontier of the twin green and digital transitions. We want to see this complemented by an open and ambitious trade policy based on high levels of co-operation with trusted partners so that we can advance global prosperity while protecting the multilateral rules-based system and defending against unfair trading practices. We should also see the Single Market, and the level playing field between the member states on which it is built, as a driver of 21st-century standards, particularly social and environmental standards. These strategic orientations are reflected strongly in the March European Council conclusions.

Leaders also called for work to be taken forward on the legislative proposals that have been presented by the Commission under the green deal industrial plan and noted the Commission's adoption of a temporary crisis and transition framework for state aid. The proposed net-zero industry Act will establish a framework of measures to strengthen Europe’s manufacturing ecosystem for net-zero technology. The proposed European critical raw materials Act will establish a framework to strengthen supply chains in critical and strategically important raw materials, factoring in their development, sustainability and circularity. This includes the goal of not being reliant on any single third country for more than two thirds of the Union's annual consumption of any specific raw material that is deemed strategically important to decarbonisation objectives. The Council’s work over the coming months to strike the right balance on these proposals, which span the responsibilities of different ministers and Council formations, will be guided by the strategic orientations agreed at the March meeting of the European Council.

The March European Council also endorsed the policy priorities presented by the Commission in the annual sustainable growth survey, and invited member states to reflect them in their national reform programmes and stability programme updates. These fall for submission to the Commission this month and will inform the Commission's proposals in May for country-specific recommendations under European semester 2023. The four dimensions of competitive sustainability highlighted by the Commission are productivity, environmental sustainability, fairness and macroeconomic stability. Leaders agreed that these continue to provide the right political emphasis to guide the economic policy of the Union and its member states at this time.

The March European Council also endorsed the ECOFIN conclusions on the economic governance review agreed by finance ministers on 14 March. These conclusions highlight areas of convergence of views among member states, as well areas where further work in the Council is needed ahead of presentation by the Commission of formal legislative proposals. Ireland supports the goal of a reformed economic governance framework that is simple and more transparent, with greater national ownership guiding more effective implementation through necessary public investment in strategic objectives.

Heads of government and state also met in euro summit format to take stock of economic and financial developments, informed by contributions from the president of the European Central Bank, Christine Lagarde, and the president of the Eurogroup, the Minister, Deputy Donohoe. We acknowledged the importance of the economic governance framework in the architecture of the economic and monetary union in securing the stability of the euro and the resilience of the euro area economy. We called for further progress on the capital markets union, with a view to mobilising investment at scale for the green and digital transition. We also called for continued efforts to complete our banking union, which is already strengthening the resilience of the EU banking system.

At the European Council, leaders discussed energy issues and took stock of the significant progress that has been made phasing out EU dependence on Russian fossil fuels.

There was a renewed focus, including through Europe's REPowerEU plan, on investment in innovation, interconnection, efficiency and renewables. These resolute actions have served to underpin security of supply, reduce energy usage and mitigate the effects of dramatic price increases seen by businesses and consumers.

Leaders also discussed preparation for winter 2023-24, with a particular emphasis on making use of the joint purchase of gas when refilling gas storage facilities. Leaders also discussed the importance of investment in energy supply grids for renewable energy distribution. The European Council called for work to be taken forward swiftly on the proposed revision of the EU's internal electricity market design, which is intended to make the market fully fit for a decarbonised energy system and facilitate the uptake of renewable energy.

Finally, at the European Council, leaders welcomed the agreement on the Windsor Framework and looked forward to the swift implementation of all agreed solutions in good faith. As the House will be aware, the framework has now been formally adopted by both the European Union and the United Kingdom. As I have said previously, I believe that agreement on the framework opens up significant economic opportunities for people and businesses in Northern Ireland. It also has the potential to open a new chapter in EU-UK relations, one in which the focus is on partnership and on the significant areas of shared interest and concern. We now need to see the institutions under the Good Friday Agreement restored, so that the people of Northern Ireland can have a devolved government in place dealing with the problems they face.

It is intended that I should travel to Brussels on 29 and 30 June for the next regular meeting of the European Council when leaders will again discuss developments in Ukraine, the economy, security and defence and preparation of the EU-Community of Latin American and Caribbean States, CELAC, summit which will to take place in Brussels on 17 and 18 July.

I also welcome Deputy Carthy to his new role and wish him well. I join with him in conveying our good wishes for a speedy recovery to the EU ambassador to Sudan, Aidan O'Hara.

The ongoing war of aggression against Ukraine dominated the EU Council agenda of 23 and 24 March. The improving spring weather brings with it the expectation of both a Ukrainian counteroffensive and perhaps further Russian aggression. Today, El País newspaper published a report that sets out the horrific situation on the ground in Ukraine with the creation by Russia of 800 km of trenches, anti-tank ditches, machine-gun emplacements and bunkers, which is a sight not seen in Europe since the 1940s. This is to defend its ill-gotten territorial advances on the territory of Ukraine. We face into a time of great danger and potential horrific bloodshed. We have just finished a meeting of the Joint Committee on EU Affairs with the Ukrainian ambassador on these issues. We can only continue to stand shoulder to shoulder with the Ukrainian people as they resist the unprecedented aggression of the past year and a half.

A number of issues that flow from this conflict were addressed at the European Council meeting, one of which is the issue of food security and the potential for an horrific impact, particularly on the continent of Africa. Much of Africa is involved in its own conflicts, with enduring drought and the impacts of climate change, and is entirely dependent on the World Food Programme for its sustenance. Much of the food which this programme is able to distribute comes traditionally from the wheat fields of Ukraine and, indeed, of Russia. Without that, there will be mass starvation and it is something which we very much have to pay attention to.

The other issue I wish to talk about in respect of the outcome of the discussions in Brussels is the notion of a robust and future-proofed economy which, to quote the conclusions of the Council, “secures long-term prosperity”. Obviously, securing long-term prosperity is a highly laudable objective but we are faced now with the real and dramatic short-term challenges of inflation and cost-of-living increases, not only in our own country but right across Europe also. We need an immediate response to that and we need more supports. I am asking the Minister of State in his response to this debate - if he might listen - to address these issues when giving that response because people are enduring real hardship right now. The interest rate increases are impacting on people in a way that is unprecedented in recent times. The fuel costs and all of these things need to have a substantial cross-European response.

A longer term issue needs to be addressed with regard to energy security for us. I ask again that the Minister of State might focus on the debate in hand. The issue of energy security is something I know the Minister of State has an interest in, along with that of offshore renewable energy. We very much need to get our fingers out. We talk about all of these things and about being independent, but we need to have real and substantial plans implemented now and to have ports identified and invested in. A shocking report in the past week indicated that if we were to service our own offshore licences now, the likelihood is that they would be serviced from Liverpool or elsewhere. The only place on the island of Ireland which is equipped is Belfast. I ask the Minister of State to ensure that investment is put into the port of Rosslare, and other ports, to ensure the ambitious programme of offshore renewable energy can be realised.

I looked at the Exchequer returns presented in the stability programme update today projecting substantial surpluses of €10 billion this year and €16 billion-plus next year, which we need to utilise to address the infrastructural deficits which are so real in our economy.

I thank the Ceann Comhairle. I was due to share with Deputy Dillon, but I understand he was not able to make it here. I will not speak for the full nine minutes, as he was due to have four or five of these. I can waffle if my colleagues wish but I would prefer to get straight to the point.

Was there any discussion at the EU Council meeting on state aid rules and EU funding and how this funding is spent, in particular, by local authorities? This relates not just to how it is spent but also to how it is applied for. If there was not such a discussion at the EU Council meeting, we very much need to have a discussion in this Chamber about how local authorities, in the first instance, spend EU funding through the different EU schemes. Second, we need to discuss how these schemes are applied for in order that local authorities are better informed and there is better communication on how local authorities should apply for schemes so that they are not, as in the case I am about to explain to the House, applying for schemes when the works are outside the remit of the scheme.

The case in point is that of Keelbeg pier in the beautiful seaside village of Union Hall, which is a very famous village in west Cork. In that instance, the council submitted an application under the Brexit adjustment local authority marine infrastructure scheme, which is known as the BALAMI fund. What the local authority applied for was clearly outside the remit of the scheme and the application was turned down for that reason. In the first instance, the authority applied for a barrier to be erected on the old pier in Union Hall. In Union Hall, there is a commercial pier which is used by the commercial fishing sector and an old pier which is used for leisure purposes. The old pier is used by some small fishing boats, by the local rowing club, by the yacht club and for numerous leisure purposes. It is used by families young and old, who just want to go for a swim in spring, summer and autumn. It is a very popular amenity but Cork County Council, despite resistance from the local community, is insisting on erecting a 2.4 m high palisade fence to stop any further use of this pier.

The local authority applied under the BALAMI fund for the erection of a barrier and for a feasibility study which is clearly outside the remit of the fund. What the authority should have applied for, and what is within the remit of the BALAMI fund, an EU fund, was repair works. These are exactly the kinds of works that the BALAMI funding has been used for elsewhere. In places like Hare Island and Laheratanvally pier, this funding is for repair works and not for the erection of a barrier. Despite the wishes of the local people and the fact that they protested in very significant numbers a number of weeks ago, and despite the fact that the representatives of the west Cork municipal district - which is the local council membership there - put a motion to the full council to suspend the works, the works are still going ahead and Cork County Council is insisting upon such works proceeding.

There is a bigger question here in respect of a discussion to be had on the erosion of local democracy. That is clearly what is happening here. The desires and wishes of the people of Union Hall, of west Cork and of the surrounding area are being ignored. I would like to see that in respect of EU funding, and funding which comes from schemes such as the BALAMI fund, a clear outline is given to local authorities on what works can and cannot be applied for, and what repair works can be applied for under BALAMI. I urge Cork County Council, even at this last minute, to abandon its plan to put in place a barrier at Keelbeg pier in Union Hall and to apply for funding instead to the BALAMI fund, or to whatever fund is applicable, to repair and restore the old pier at Keelbeg, to give it back to the people and to let the people use it. That is a last-minute plea.

On the EU nitrates directive, was a discussion had at the EU Council about the new decision to reduce the stocking rates from 250 kg of organic nitrates to 220 kg and the impact this will have on Irish farms? There are unintended consequences. The notion behind the reduction concerns river quality, water quality and the state and health of our waterways. We all want cleaner, more healthy waterways but my fear is the decision to reduce the stocking rate will have an unintended impact on the environment. Smaller farmholds with maybe 70 cows will come under pressure. There are farms with bigger herd numbers and larger stocks. It is happening already. There will be pressure on land. Land will be bought up that could otherwise be used for tillage, forestry, afforestation or biodiversity, for example. Huge pressure will be put on land around Ireland to adhere to these new stocking rates. I have serious concerns about that. There has to be balance regarding the impact this move will have on smaller family farms. I am thinking of my cousin, who lives in west Cork. He has a herd of approximately 70 cows. Under the directive, because he does not have the option to increase, lease or buy land, he will have to reduce his herd to approximately 40, which will make it unviable.

Farmers throughout Ireland are putting in place measures that are clearly having a positive impact on water quality. I see it in the Timoleague catchment area, where measures such as greater storage, methods of spreading manure and protected urea are having a positive impact on the volume of nitrates getting into our waterways. They are the types of measures we should follow, not this blanket blunt instrument that could have a negative impact on farms, farm incomes and, importantly, the environment. That issue should be examined further before we do something that has unintended consequences.

We are in a housing emergency and the Government's housing policy is a disaster. Almost 12,000 people, including more than 3,300 children, are now living in emergency accommodation. Rents are skyrocketing - up 13.7% in 2022 - while at the same time the Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage has failed to spend more than €1 billion from his capital budget. The Government is in denial. It is ignoring the homelessness figures, the regular protests and even warnings from employers. The Government is refusing to treat this situation as an emergency because that would involve admitting that Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael and the Green Party have utterly failed to address the housing disaster. It seems the real barrier to taking immediate and effective action is the Government's pride. Despite all the evidence of missed targets and unspent budgets, it refuses to admit its plan is not working. Thousands of children, families and workers are paying the price for that failure and no end is in sight.

Our motion is about one simple action the Government can take today. It is a single policy intervention that would make a substantial difference to families desperately looking for homes in our cities, towns and villages, namely, to implement a credible vacant homes tax with teeth. The Social Democrats have consistently called for this. The current tax is tokenistic. It is a derisory 0.3%. The Government's tax is not designed to get empty homes back into use. It is designed to maintain the status quo . More than 100,000 vacant homes are sitting idle across the country. At a time when house prices are increasing in value by an average of 7.8% annually, a 0.3% tax on vacant sites is so low it is laughable. The average value of a house in 2022 was €359,000. Last year, the average vacant home increased in value by a whopping €28,000. If we compare this figure with the charge imposed by the Government's vacant homes tax, it means the tax is a little more than €1,000. This is a net gain of €27,000 for those who decide to leave homes vacant, yet the Government wants people to believe that it thinks this is somehow an incentive to compel property owners to bring vacant homes back into use.

At a time when 3,300 children are homeless, this level of inaction is morally reprehensible. Why is the Government facilitating it? Imagine the difference it would make if tens of thousands of vacant homes and apartments all over the country were made available to families. Making use of unoccupied homes makes economic, social and environmental sense. The quickest way to deliver housing would provide huge benefits for families and communities. The most frustrating aspect of all this is that the Government claims to agree in principle. It is just not willing to act with the level of intensity and scale that is needed. This summarises the failed approach of the Government and previous Fine Gael governments when it comes to housing. It lacks ambition, action, intensity, credibility and results.

Fine Gael has promised a tax on vacant homes since 2017. This Government finally introduced that tax this year but set it so low it makes no real difference. A tax with real teeth is needed to incentivise owners of vacant homes to use, rent or sell them. A vacant homes tax rate of 10% may seem high, but this is an emergency measure to respond to an unprecedented crisis. The existing exemptions would remain for cases such as a home being empty because the owner is in long-term care, the home being in probate, or farm buildings that are derelict. This is the type of intervention a responsible government should make. It is the type of intervention the Social Democrats would make in government. There is a clear need for a targeted and specific measure to address the scourge of vacancy and help alleviate the housing disaster. That is what we are proposing. Why is the Government unwilling to act?

The housing crisis is the single biggest issue facing the country currently. It impacts every aspect of people’s lives, affects physical and mental health and has negative consequences for employment. Where is the urgency? Where are the interventions to really encourage those sitting on vacant properties to rent or sell them? The Government’s vacant homes tax is designed to pretend. It is a policy designed to give the illusion of action. That is all it is - an illusion. We need effective measures that will result in homes for the tens of thousands of workers and families who need them and we need these policies to deliver these homes rapidly. There is a massive stock of vacant homes that could be unlocked if the Government were willing to act. Clearly, it is not.

Yes, and possibly the Cooley Peninsula. There has been considerable conversation about being 25 years into the Good Friday Agreement. There were many twists and turns before and after that period but it is the lynchpin of what has been a very successful peace process. In the world we are dealing with at this point in time, many lessons would need to be learned.

I discussed the Windsor Framework with the Taoiseach earlier. American support and European solidarity have been vital and it seems that is to continue. We all want to see the DUP get into government with the rest of us. The fear is drift. I would like to think all our partners and, particularly, the Government will have some positive trajectory in making sure we do not allow this drift to happen.

We have spoken of the geopolitical position we find ourselves in on the basis of a wholly wrong and unjustified war by Putin on Ukraine. We have to maintain that solidarity. There has been considerable conversation at the EU Council on global food security and related issues. I seek an update on that. There is pushback from certain groupings in looking for leeway on sanctions from the point of view of global food security. This needs to be addressed. I call on the Minister of State to give an update on it.

We all stand in solidarity with Ukraine but if we talk about justice and integrity on an international basis, then we have to look after others in the world. The plight of the Palestinian people has been brought up as regards the attack on the Al-Aqsa Mosque. We are talking about annexation, apartheid, racism, attacks, killings, and death. We are talking about a very right-wing Israeli Government. We want European Union solidarity on this but the Irish Government will have to do heavy lifting. That will be the occupied territories Bill and recognising the state of Palestine. It is Deputy Brady’s legislation. It is not okay that a State entity such as the Ireland Strategic Investment Fund is a shareholder in companies involved in the occupied territories.

There are 166,000 houses sitting vacant, a number of which are in my constituency. Why is the Government not bringing these on stream or facilitating that? It is the quickest way of bringing houses into the market. The Government should be focused on doing that but, unfortunately, it is not putting the required emphasis on that for some reason. As my colleagues have said, this makes the best use of these houses not only economically and socially but also environmentally because the most environmentally sustainable house is the one that is already built. The measures we are bringing forward would allow us to bring homes onto the market without a major increase in carbon output that solely depending on new builds would create.

This tax is good for the housing market. It makes most sense for hard-pressed renters and buyers. It is the least worst option from an environmental standpoint and, most important, it is what is needed now.

Those travelling in small boats are victims of unilateralism to the same degree as Ukraine but the Commission remains much quieter on the issue, which neglect I believe is criminal. The EU cannot have a double standard for those in need. Ukraine must continue to receive our support but those fleeing war, persecution and poverty, from wherever that may be in the world, must not be ignored or worse.

The EU's silence on the UK's illegal migration Bill is deafening and must be urgently replaced by condemnation. The UK Home Secretary Suella Braverman was overjoyed with the fact that migrants, refugees and even victims of trafficking could be sent against their will to Rwanda and yet the EU seems to remain silent. According to the Refugee Council and common sense this is a blatant human rights violation yet Suella Braverman simply laughed in the face of it. We got to see her face as she laughed at the centre in Rwanda. What should be also condemned is the handshake between the UK Prime Minister and the Prime Minister of France as they agreed the UK would pay France to effectively extend the borders of the UK to stop refugees coming in. The EU's response to the illegal treatment of Ukrainians this week was instant. As a member state we must urge condemnation of these outrageous plans for vulnerable people entering the UK.

In the same vein, the European Union has been too quiet on the €530 million the UK will pay to France over the next three years to fund detention centres to further the Tory Party's right-wing agenda and to further fortress Europe, bringing it closer to our borders. The co-ordinated response of these two former colonial powers spits in the face of the global response, which has been largely one of compassion and solidarity for migrants and refugees since the beginning of Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

The deal fails to address the factors behind people choosing to put themselves at risk to try to reach the UK in the first place and will do little to end the crossings. If anything, those who are forced to cross are now in greater danger. The vast majority of those taking these perilous journeys are refugees escaping for their lives from conflict zones throughout the world. Safer routes are needed and not armed patrols. Nobody searching for a better life should have a gun or a baton stuck in their face.

Sadly, this is only one of the many appalling issues on which the EU seems to have remained silent at this particular council meeting. I do not think time will permit me to speak about the neglect of the Palestinian peoples. This month, once again, Israel's security forces broke into the Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem. In pre-European Council statements we asked the Taoiseach whether he would raise it and now, in our post-Council statements, we are asking why it was not raised.

We cannot neglect the horrendous situation happening in the Horn of Africa at present. We are now into the third year of drought and hardship, and the resilience of those affected is being pushed beyond it limits. The European Union and all of us need to do better to ensure we can get grains to those people to stave off famine and drought.

The Russian invasion of Ukraine has sparked a debate here about Ireland's traditional policy of military neutrality. Once again on the Continent of Europe this issue is concentrating minds. In this regard I welcome the establishment by the Tánaiste of the consultative forum on international security policy. I understand that meetings are due to be held in June in Dublin, Cork and Galway as part of this initiative. It is time for a respectful debate on the security threats we face and to see whether our foreign and defence policies need to be updated in light of these ongoing developments. It is important the forum involves widespread consultation and considers all points of view.

US President Joe Biden, in his address to the Joint Houses of the Oireachtas last week, quoted John F. Kennedy when he spoke in this Chamber in 1963. He said, "Ireland pursues an independent course in foreign policy, but is not neutral between liberty and tyranny and it never will be". This quote still adequately reflects our position today. Some have suggested that President Biden in his address hinted that Ireland should consider joining the NATO military alliance. I certainly did not hear that message. From what I can see, there is no pressure from our fellow EU member states to do so either, even though Finland is now a member of NATO and Sweden has applied to join. In my view there should be no question of us joining NATO. The legal position as regards this matter is set out in a protocol to the Lisbon treaty as well as in Article 29.4.9° of Bunreacht na hÉireann and Article 42 of the Lisbon treaty which provides for a mutual assistance clause.

All this said, it is clear that we actively participate in the EU's Common Security and Defence Policy, CDSP. We participate in EU battle groups and permanent structured co-operation, PESCO, missions. We pay into the European Defence Fund. We have signed up for the strategic compass and the commitments involved in this. We have provided non-lethal support to Ukraine under the European Peace Facility. We have signed up to the EU training mission in Ukraine. It is worth remembering that at the end of the day defence remains a national competence and we can retain the power to opt in or opt out of these missions as appropriate. Our participation in the CSDP does not inhibit our ability to pursue our unique foreign-policy objectives.

President Biden last week, and Samantha Power more recently, highlighted our special efforts in the fight against global hunger. We are active participants in UN and EU peacekeeping, crisis management and conflict prevention missions. We continue to advocate for disarmament and non-proliferation. We are especially concerned about adherence to international humanitarian law and the protection of fundamental human rights. All this should contribute to be the cornerstone of our foreign and defence policies.

The Tánaiste's forum needs to take a closer look at the so-called triple lock, whereby the Cabinet and the Dáil need to give approval for the deployment of our Defence Forces overseas and any mission must be backed up by a UN Security Council resolution. We cannot have a position whereby Russia, for example, can veto our objectives at the UN Security Council. The forum should also seriously consider new threats in respect of cybersecurity, hybrid warfare and critical infrastructure, and how we should co-operate with other states that share our values to combat these threats. I wish the forum well and look forward to engaging with it.

I want to say a few words in the debate about relations between the EU and China. Last week in his Dáil address President Biden referred to the ongoing conflict between autocracies and democracies. It seems relations between the US and China are very poor at this time. Where does the EU stand in this regard? As we know, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and French President Emmanuel Macron recently met the Chinese President Xi Jinping in Beijing. It would appear that the EU has adopted a policy of wait and see in this regard. It has rightly called on China to use its influence with Russia to bring about a just peace in Ukraine. The EU also has concerns about Taiwan and the use of sensitive technologies among other things while it continues to strive for strategic autonomy, particularly as regards threats to our trade and economic development. In short, the EU wishes to de-risk in respect of China and that is probably the wisest policy.

Conclusion 27 of the European Council meeting is worth commenting on. It states the European Council welcomes the agreement on the Windsor Framework and looks forward to the swift implementation of all agreed solutions in good faith. It seems that after seven years the problem is very close to being resolved. The DUP has been given time and space to consider the framework and I hope it will be able to accept it as a satisfactory compromise. In any event, I also hope it will re-enter Stormont and allow the Assembly to function and the Executive to be formed as soon as possible.

President Biden's message that political stability would bring about substantial investment in the North is well made and should be given serious consideration by all concerned.

We should also note that after many years Ireland has agreed to alter its corporate tax regime. From next year, there will be a minimum effective tax rate of 15% on firms with a turnover in excess of €750 million. This arises from the new OECD agreement on this matter. How this will be implemented at global level will be crucial. It appears that the US will have difficulties in legislating for this proposal, and the question of where profits are to be taxed has not yet been resolved. We await developments at EU and US level in this regard.

Energy supply continues to be an issue of concern. The EU must continue to bring forward measures to deal with high energy prices, the demand for gas, the need for security of supply and the phasing out of the dependency on Russian oil, gas and coal. That work is continuing at EU level.

When is enough enough? When will the Government say, "Enough is enough", to apartheid Israel? When will the Government say to our European partners that we can no longer stand over allowing apartheid Israel to practice apartheid? When are we going to tell the Israelis that enough is enough and that they cannot keep stealing Palestinian land? When are we going to tell them that they cannot keep setting up illegal settlements? When are we going to tell them that they have to stop destroying the hopes and prospects for a peace solution? When are we going to tell them that they have to stop shooting children, destroying farms and administrative detention? When are we going to carry out actions that will make it clear that Israeli terror is not acceptable? Two actions we could take would be to introduce Senator Black's Control of Economic Activity (Occupied Territories) Bill 2018 and to recognise the state of Israel. It is beyond me-----

Sorry, the state of Palestine. At least someone was listening to me.

We must recognise the state of Palestine. The previous Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Coveney, said that he might have recognised the Palestinian state if progress towards a two-state solution had stalled. It cannot get any more stalled than it is now. We have an extreme, fascist Israeli Government. Members of the Israeli Government were not fit to do military service.

Have I used up my time?

Yes.

The Deputy should have kept talking.

I also thank Deputy Cian O'Callaghan and the Social Democrats for bringing forward the motion. The number of residential properties recorded as vacant in December 2022 was 83,662. That is a significant stock of unused properties and if the correct incentives to dissuade people from allowing their properties to sit idle were in place it would go some way to addressing the housing shortage in County Tipperary. Instead, the Minister's vacant property tax of 0.3% will deter few and ultimately misses the opportunity. That is where the central argument of this motion comes into play, because Sinn Féin has repeatedly said bringing vacant homes back into use is one of the quickest and most sustainable ways to increase the supply of housing.

Speed of supply is essential for the people in my constituency who have been issued with notices to quit. I have recently found myself not just representing people who have been issued with notices to quit, but notifying the council of impending evictions. As we firefight what is already happening, people's needs are harder and harder to meet. However, in not making the most of vacant properties, the Government slows the process down for people whose needs are immediate. Some 20% of Sinn Féin's public housing build programme in 2023 would have come from vacant and derelict buildings, but the Government prefers to present aspirational figures for the future as current achievements, as is the case with social housing, while at the same time avoiding the reality of its failures in affordable housing. The Department's own data, which are now no longer hidden, confirm that in 2022 no local authority affordable housing units were delivered in Tipperary. If the Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage is going to defend himself on his record in bringing vacant properties in need of repair back into use, how many units were delivered under the repair and leasing scheme in my county last year? The answer is zero. It was also zero in 2021 and 2020. To compound this, there was an underspend of €1 billion at a time when the money should have been used to build affordable homes. How is that possible? How did we not have an overspend, given the scale of the crisis and the increased costs?

Sinn Féin would dramatically increase capital funding to local authorities, approved housing bodies and community housing trusts to deliver good-quality affordable homes while stripping away the red tape and streamlining the delivery process. Instead, the Government has provided a vacant property tax that is nothing but a gesture. It will not do what it is supposed to do because it is light-touch. It will not act as a disincentive to the hoarding of empty properties. The most important people, namely those in desperate need of housing, will continue to ask where they are to go.

I was contacted last week by a constituent. She said, "I am facing homelessness and I don't know where I'm going to go, but there's a house in my area that has been empty for ages." I am not the only one who gets these messages with photos of empty houses through Facebook and via email. I am not the only one who sees empty homes in every single estate with leaflets stacked high in hallways. We trek back down the driveway and we wonder what the backstory is. We cannot get every single house back into use because there are legitimate reasons why some are empty. However, there are tens of thousands of empty houses that are ready to be occupied. Would it not be amazing if this Government were as ruthless in implementing its stated policy of a vacant homes tax as it was in ending the eviction ban?

The main process that is taking place across Europe, which is reflected in the council conclusions, is a process of rapid and dangerous militarisation under the leadership of US imperialism. It is a process that has different aspects and national specifics but it is heading in the same direction in all countries. For example, Germany is massively increasing its military spending, Finland and Sweden have applied to join NATO and increased their military spending and in this country we are seeing an attempt to de facto and later de jure get rid of what is left of neutrality. That is clear.

In this country, since Putin's horrendous invasion of Ukraine, there have been quite rapid moves to go much further than any previous Government has gone, in walking well over the line of neutrality. We have had the sending of military aid to another country. It was the first time the EU sent military aid to a third country. Ireland participated and then said, "Oh no do not worry, we paid for the non-lethal bits." It did not change the overall package of military aid. It is a fig leaf for the Government to hide behind. Ireland has now repeatedly participated in meetings of what is described by the US Secretary of Defense as a NATO alliance, which is the Ukraine Defense Contact Group, an organisation that meets at either NATO headquarters in Brussels or NATO Allied Air Command at the Ramstein air base in Germany. Ireland is now sending troops to participate in a military assistance mission organised by the EU with the express purpose of enhancing the military capability of the Ukrainian armed forces.

It is not enough for the Government to be able to walk all over any concept of neutrality in practice; it also wants to get rid of it in principle, in something the Government is politically bound by. That is why consultative forums are being established. It is revealing that the Minister for Foreign Affairs stated slightly more than a month ago that we could have a citizens' assembly. Instead, what we have are national consultative forums made up of experts supposedly inspired by the principles of the citizens' assembly but which most importantly avoid the key principle of the citizens' assembly, that is, a random selection of citizens. Instead we will have a stage-managed, top-down process in which we will hear from experts, some of whom will be funded by the armaments industry to say why we all must be mature and so on and move on from neutrality. That is linked to the essential essence of Joe Biden's speech to the joint sitting of the Oireachtas last week, in which he effectively spoke about a new cold war. He stated that the key struggle in the world today is between democracy and autocracy and that the US knows that Ireland is on the side of democracy versus autocracy. Of course, Joe Biden was not actually talking about democracy and autocracy. They are just words he uses to mean the West and the East. President Biden did not mention his ongoing support for the apartheid State of Israel, the state attacks on Palestinians in the Al-Aqsa Mosque or the state-endorsed attacks by far-right settlers, endorsed by a far-right government, on Palestinians. There was no mention of US military support of Saudi Arabia and its killing of more than 20,000 Yemeni civilians or of the fact that a majority of dictatorships in the world today receive military aid from US imperialism. Clearly what is happening is the lining up of the so-called West versus the East and the Government wants us to be part of the US-led NATO camp.

We should reject both strands of imperialism and the multiple strands of imperialism that exist in the world today. We should reject all forms of oppression and consistently stand against it. With regard to Ukraine, we should continue to condemn Putin's horrendous invasion of Ukraine and the denial of the Ukrainian people's right to self-determination but we also should call for peace. An incredible 300,000 people, according to some reports, have died in Ukraine. The lines of war have barely moved in months, more and more weapons are being thrown into the battlefield and ordinary people are dying as a consequence. We should raise our voice for peace.

Finally, I want to raise the question of Nord Stream, a question that somehow nobody wants to find an answer to. Who is responsible for the destruction of Nord Stream, which saw gas prices rise dramatically and which caused the biggest single discharge of methane the world has ever seen? It seems that nobody is interested in finding out who is responsible. In fact, the US and several allies abstained on a recent vote at the UN Security Council to block a resolution providing for an independent, international investigation to find out who is responsible for the attack on Nord Stream. Did the Government ask that of Joe Biden? I seriously doubt it.

I was reading the concluding statements of the European Council meeting this morning and noted how strong they were in respect of Russia's barbaric war in Ukraine, and rightly so. However, I was also thinking that we could change these statements to reflect what is happening in the occupied territories of Palestine. One could easily change the statement that "The European Council reiterates its resolute condemnation of Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine" to "The European Council reiterates its resolute condemnation of Israel's war of aggression against Palestine".

"Russia must stop its aggression and immediately, completely and unconditionally withdraw all its military forces from the entire territory of Ukraine" could easily read, with the right political will, that "Israel must stop its aggression and immediately, completely and unconditionally withdraw all its military forces from the entire territory of Palestine". I could go on. A quick search told me that during that concluding statement neither Israel nor Palestine were mentioned once. The European Council is right to condemn Russia but is equally wrong to ignore the plight of the Palestinian people. Since the start of 2023, 95 Palestinians have been killed in cold blood, among them 17 children. On 20 March Israel passed legislation again enabling Israeli settlers to colonise areas in the north of the occupied West Bank. Israel must respect international law, including humanitarian and human rights law, in the occupied Palestinian territories. Israel must comply with its international legal obligations including and in accordance with UN resolutions. Ireland and this Government must finally recognise the state of Palestine.

I wish to send best wishes to Ambassador Aidan O'Hara and his family for what they have gone through.

At the Committee on Public Petitions earlier this year we discussed with the European Ombudsman various reports, among which was noted the changing world within which the EU operates and the response of the EU institutions to those changes. However, troubling issues remain, such as what the ombudsman described as a porous ethical framework that has been found to exist. Qatargate was one, involving allegations of foreign governments buying and attempting to buy influence at the European Parliament. Of course that is just one incident of concern. I read that assurances were given and in light of Qatargate certain measures have been put in place. However, there are still concerns that the committee looking into breaches of the rules is not sufficiently independent and that it cannot independently investigate anything until the Parliament asks it to do so. Were Members comforted by assurances that work is being done to address the issues thrown up by recent controversies? How much further is there to go on this until the reputation of the EU institutions can recover significantly in the eyes of the public?

Since the Council we have witnessed the Al-Aqsa Mosque and the push by the Israeli Government to further pursue far-right ideologies. However, Israel’s ongoing activities in the occupied territories, which amount to nothing less than apartheid, have long been present. Shortly before the EU Council meeting, a statement was issued citing the EU’s shared responsibility to prepare the ground for peace. What approach has this Government taken?

Finally, state aid rules were mentioned. Where are we on our belated application in regard to the forestry programme? Fine words about a robust and future-proof economy that secures long-term prosperity are all very well but if we are late in coming to the table when it comes to our own interests then the sector itself has been failed.

I welcome the opportunity to make some comments on the most recent EU Council meeting in Brussels on 23 March. I welcome the fact that the UN Secretary General, António Guterres, was present physically and that President Zelenskyy dialled in remotely. That is good practice. The EU should be reaching out to third countries, particularly EU accession countries. We should also engage with the wider global community of the UN, especially as the UN was so influential in securing the Black Sea grain initiative which has had positive second-order effects throughout the world.

It is right that Ukraine dominated the agenda. It is the most pressing issue in Europe and beyond at the moment. I welcome the fact that there was a major emphasis on accountability at this conference and that there was a welcome for the arrest warrants for Putin and some of his senior staff in the Kremlin. Also there were calls, however futile, for Russia unilaterally to impose a ceasefire on itself and withdraw behind the internationally recognised frontier between Ukraine and Russia. That is a good thing. There were also calls to respect international humanitarian law in relation to the treatment of prisoners of war and civilians. I concur with what the Taoiseach said in regard to the return of abductees from Ukraine, particularly children. This is an utterly despicable war crime. The sooner those people return safely the better off we all will be.

The other issue I wish to highlight is the emphasis on the repair, recovery and reconstruction of Ukraine. It is good that there is talk of establishing a mechanism whereby the international community can register what damage Russia inflicts on Ukraine. Even from a deterrent point of view, that is good practice. One particular question the Minister of State might follow up on in his wrapping-up comments is the issue of a freeze and sieze of Russian assets taking place throughout the globe at the moment. About €1.5 billion has been seized in Ireland alone. It would be interesting to find out - I cannot find the answer - whether it has become a freeze, seize and use option. It would be useful if some of those assets were used to reconstruct some of the damage that has been done, in particular in the western parts of Ukraine. That would be a good precedent to establish. It would certainly help from a deterrent point of view. If it is not happening perhaps we could ask why. If it is not happening perhaps we should start to make it happen. We do not need to wait for the end of the conflict to use these assets. Ukraine is a big country. We could begin that process as soon as possible.

In regard to the support for the counter-offensive, we are all pro-peace and anti-war in this Chamber. Unfortunately for the first time in 77 years on this Continent there is one large belligerent who has no interest in peace. If he had an interest in peace he would not have started the conflict in the first place. It is appropriate, in light of these circumstances, that the EU supports the counter-offensive which is expected in the next couple of weeks. I wish the Ukraine armed forces every success in that offensive because Ireland is deeply impacted. It is in Ireland’s vital national interests that Ukraine is successful and all the second-order effects that have been visited upon this country are relieved as soon as possible.

In regard to energy, I welcome the fact that there is a focus on next winter already. It is good that there is emphasis on reducing the use of natural gas and dependence on Russian fossil fuels. There is a call to increase storage for natural gas over the summer. That is a particularly significant problem from an Irish perspective. We are the only EU country that has no gas storage. The only storage we have is the 48-hours’ supply in the pipes. I welcome the Minister, Deputy Eamon Ryan, thinking out loud over the past few days about the possibility of a floating LNG terminal. I do not care whether it is LNG or whether it is floating but we need a natural gas storage facility in this country. It is not good enough to rely on the pipes from Corrib or from Moffat. We should be sensible, prudent and rational and make appropriate preparations for the winter ahead.

In summary, I welcome the endorsement of the Windsor Framework and the donor emphasis for the post-earthquake scenario in Syria and Türkiye. I wish to echo the comments of some of my colleagues in regard to Aidan O’Hara, the Irish citizen EU ambassador in Sudan. This emphasises once again that Ireland does not have the national sovereign reach to get to our diplomats in difficulty abroad. This happened unexpectedly. We only had a few days’ notice. That, in theory, can happen to any of our diplomats abroad. We do not have that capacity and we should. I welcome the fact that the Tánaiste signed a contract for a new aircraft for €68 million prior to Christmas. However, we do not know how long it will take. It may be two years before that aircraft arrives. Will the Minister indicate when in 2025 we can expect to have this capability so that we can get to our diplomats who are doing exceptionally important and dangerous work abroad, particularly in hostile environments?

It is amazing how much recent statements on European Council meetings have been dominated by the war in Ukraine. It shows how there has been such a significant shift and the impact that war has had. The key issues with respect to the inflation crisis and the war are increased interest rates from the ECB and a very significant increase in fuel costs. Both those issues are having a real impact on households and the cost of living across the Continent. The Government has taken significant steps. Another €200 payment will be going towards fuel costs, but as we head into the winter and as many people on fixed rates start to exit those, we need, at both domestic and European levels, to continue to protect people from the impacts of those two issues, especially over next winter and into 2024. Government alone cannot protect or insulate people entirely from the impact of those, but we need to do more and it cannot just be at a national level. There must be a clear European response.

Something that transcends any one European Council meeting is the issue of immigration and the attempt by some within the European political spectrum to vilify the people fleeing war, vilify the impact they have on any one country and to exploit the very genuine needs and frustrations often in very disadvantaged communities across the Continent. Europe must ask itself a significant question. Europe has been dominated by extreme ideologies for more that 100 years in different ways. These include Bolshevism, fascism, communism and different forms of extreme ideology. There are many who believe our current liberal form of democracy is worth protecting, but if we are to truly protect it, we must ensure we go into the communities that are experiencing disadvantage, where there is generational unemployment, issues of addiction and child poverty, and have Europe invest in them at a European-wide level in the way it did successfully, in terms of regional policy, in rural areas. Ireland benefited hugely from European investment in rural Ireland and in regional policy, but there are urban areas across our Continent that now need that same investment.

Of course, national governments should not shirk their responsibilities and we need to do far more as a national government to tackle those issues, which happen over a generation rather than over any one Government term. I welcome the current Government's commitment to roll out the north-east inner city model to new communities. That will help. It provides interagency responses to issues of disadvantage. However, if we do not tackle at a European-wide level these issues in our core cities, where disadvantage is being exploited by the people on the far right who believe the World Economic Forum is some kind of world government that is coming in to take over, then those fears will be exploited by the populist right and we will lose the very sacred form of liberal democracy that serves us well and serves the nation well. I hope the Government can echo that at a European level and that we have a wider European response to these issues, rather than relying on national governments alone.

Deputy McAuliffe was collecting "isms" there. We should not neglect to include late-stage neoliberal capitalism in that list, which is probably the root cause of that kind of social isolation, more so than some of the even less attractive forms he listed. Before I get going, I welcome the Taoiseach's mention of the sustainable development goals and the fact they were discussed at the Council. This is a big year for Ireland with respect to the goals. We have that voluntary national report to make in July, so I am glad to hear it remains at the forefront of the Taoiseach's mind.

I mention also something that occurred today in the European Parliament, namely that its members voted to accept the emissions trading scheme, ETS. It is a large and delicate piece of work which involves the carbon border adjustment mechanism, or CBAM as it is termed. Much delicate work was done by my Green Party colleagues in the Parliament, Ciarán Cuffe and Grace O'Sullivan. It was the second bite of the cherry in terms of getting that over the line and it is extremely important legislation and work that will protect us against just offshoring the carbon effects of the production of, for example, steel, cement or fertiliser. The latter will have an effect in the Irish context. It should not be the case that we can simply move those carbon emissions outside the EU and forget about it. It is important people who produce those types of goods within the EU are able to compete on a level playing field and ETS and CBAM, if I am not losing everybody in the acronyms, in particular is an important piece of work.

I will stick with the acronyms and raise CCS, or carbon capture and storage. One of the matters discussed at this European Council meeting was carbon removal certification. I am sceptical of technophile solutions to the climate crisis we face. CCS will play a role, but the temptation is there to overhype the role it can play. When we are facing up to the climate crisis we must also recognise we are in a biodiversity crisis and we should be layering the solutions to one on top of the other. There is a huge opportunity to do that not with technological solutions, or technophile solutions that the technology is not yet there for, but with nature-based solutions. I say that in reference to an informal meeting of the environment ministers on 18 April, where they discussed enabling conditions for the business community to halt and reverse biodiversity loss. That reminded me immediately of recommendation 17 of the recent Citizens' Assembly on Biodiversity Loss, which stated "The Irish business community needs to engage with biodiversity and show leadership in the same way that they have begun to engage with the issue of the climate crisis". The Taoiseach attended a Chambers Ireland event in Dublin Castle recently. At the event, Mary Robinson exhorted the members of Chambers Ireland to be ten times bolder. We absolutely need to be ten times bolder in how we face up to the climate crisis. In addition, and looking at things like the citizens' assembly, let us implement its recommendations. Let us be ten times bolder within this Parliament and let us ask businesses to be ten times bolder in stepping up to the plate and how we respond.

I mention briefly the upgrade of our grid, and ports infrastructure was mentioned at the Council. This is pivotal if we want to unlock the enormous potential for renewable energy we have off our coasts. That in turn will also be important for the carbon border adjustment mechanism. If Germany is to continue to produce steel and if we are to produce fertiliser, then we need to make use of the renewable energy we can onshore here through our ports and grid infrastructure. That will ultimately help us get the pieces of the jigsaw to fit together.

I raise the serious concerns around the fact agriculture's relevance in the EU policy sphere is diminishing. It is obvious to all of us. We are witnessing decisions in Brussels, and increasingly in Dublin from Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael and the Green Party, that seems to indicate cows' days are numbered. That is a pity. There is a situation highlighted in a letter signed by 16 EU agriculture ministers in February. I wonder whether the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine, Deputy McConalogue, signed it. The letter was sent to the Swedish EU Presidency to complain about the serious risk of the marginalisation of the role of agriculture within EU policymaking. One thing is now certain, namely, that both here and across the EU bloc, increased space devoted to climate and environmental challenges is depriving farmers and the food sector in general of the opportunity to produce food at low cost. The dramatic shift in focus in policy here and in Brussels is leaving farmers feeling as though they are being bypassed by environmental priorities. It is quite obvious to them.

We have witnessed the Government pushing ahead with forced reductions in livestock emissions, simply because the bureaucrats in Brussels and Dublin want to see this happen. This shift in policy is creating considerable problems for consumers, with food inflation on the rise and farmers facing some of the toughest times in recent history. Weather is one contributor to that and climatic conditions were always there. They are squeezed by skyrocketing feed, input and energy costs as well.

It is also clear that the area of competence for agriculture within the policymaking area that makes up the EU institutions is now shrinking because of the unveiling of the EU's flagship environmental policy, the so-called Green Deal. The deal is not only detrimental to agriculture but also to rural economies. Yet it has been embraced as a silver bullet by this Government, despite its damaging effects on rural communities. When the food part of the farm to fork strategy was presented to the EU agricultural heads, it was totally shocking to us in the Rural Independent Group. We are calling on Government to provide clarity in this area. It is not acceptable and we will not have an agricultural industry if it continues in this vein.

I thank the Social Democrats for tabling another well-intentioned motion on housing. Unfortunately, the motion, as presented, while well-intentioned, simply underpins the false narrative that has been advanced by Governments for the past ten years. It is nothing more than a deluded application of centralised policies to follow the groupthink of all the parties in this House that this will solve the problem. Continuously speaking about the effects of the housing crisis, and a continuous failure to diagnose the cause, is the central theme in housing. People are sick to death of hearing it. Government, and those aspiring to be in government, must engage with all stakeholders in housing. The dead hand of government is the central cause of this crisis. Government planning policy and its application continues to undermine housing supply. The Government has issued two further sets of guidelines in the past couple of weeks for public consultation, which demonstrates that it has no idea how to solve the crisis. Opposition parties bring forward motions that theoretically work very well on paper but practically are unimplementable.

It would appear that the lepers of the housing industry in Ireland are the developers. These are the people who can deliver housing and nobody on any side of this House is engaging or listening to them. Senior politicians in Government are held hostage by their senior civil servants and the Planning Regulator; it appears they have Stockholm syndrome. In times past we were told by a regulator that the Irish banks were well capitalised. We had a regulator who was asleep at the wheel. The Planning Regulator is now asleep at the wheel. All the supply issues are of his making. We have a Minister whose issue is not that he is unable to identify the problem but that he is afraid to tackle the cause. In order to solve the greatest shitshow this country has ever seen, the Minister needs to grow a pair and start immediately implementing policies that are required to make supply happen. The regulator is playing the music and the Minister is dancing to the tune while Opposition parties and the fourth estate clap along. It is a simple case of Nero fiddling as Rome burns. It is about time the rubbish stopped or we will never be able to break free from this rental limbo in which the Government has put us. The affordability or viability crisis will also never be over unless we change how we do things. That means taking real, decisive action that works. Change means policies that work. It means strong leadership and standing up and being counted when faced with officials who will not listen.

It seems the most recent European Council meeting was, once again, completely dominated by discussions of the conflict in Ukraine. This is an important issue but I note there was no mention of the increased violence in Palestine, where many Palestinians, including children, are suffering from Israel’s apartheid, or of Yemen, where the war is getting more and more violent and where it seems that China is building peace there while the EU is sitting on its hands. Instead the Council agreed to deliver "ground-to-ground and artillery ammunition" and missiles to Ukraine, and what is more is that some of the funding for this is being provided through the European Peace Facility. In what way does providing 1 million rounds of artillery ammunition within the next 12 months encourage or facilitate peace? The Irish Government supported this move while at the same time being vocal about how important peace is in Northern Ireland. It is completely hypocritical for the Taoiseach to call for "peace and prosperity for the people of Northern Ireland" and to then attend this Council meeting only three days later and support the provision of artillery, instead of advocating for peace talks and a ceasefire.

I am concerned with the Government’s decision to review Ireland’s policy on neutrality and defence and I am also concerned with the way in which this will be done. Ireland has a long-standing and proud position of neutrality and the consideration of such an important policy stance should be given to a citizens’ assembly, not just a public forum. I am sceptical of the Government’s reasons for setting up this forum. I am aware the Tánaiste said the intention is not to encourage a change in Ireland’s neutrality policy. However, it was only last year that the Tánaiste said there should be a discussion on Ireland’s neutrality following the war in Ukraine. There is no public interest whatsoever in a debate on our neutrality. The public are overwhelmingly in favour of neutrality, as we have seen from a recent poll by The Irish Times and Ipsos.

This forum should instead focus on how to strengthen our stance on peace, especially in light of the 25th anniversary of the Good Friday Agreement. The Government has to be honest about the fact it has done little to contribute to peace in the North. This peace has been the work of the people on the ground in the North, and not of those who signed an agreement 25 years ago and then left them to it. This forum is an opportunity to consider the stronger role we can play in encouraging and sustaining peace on our island, as well as in other countries across the world. That is what we should be focusing on, rather than on getting rid of neutrality.

These measures must be implemented by 1 May 2023. These include extending the vacant property scheme to allow people renting out properties to be included in the scheme. Second, the age of the property has to be brought forward to 2007 rather than 1993. The other aspect to this is that the grant available is not good enough to meet the huge increase in construction inflation that has occurred during the past year alone. The Department of Education has increased its cost limits by 21% alone in three months. That is a positive first step to achieving some progress in bringing buildings back into use.

Equally, though, this addresses only part of the problem. We also need to look at how we deal with the planning around these projects. I have cases where the planning exemption certificate has been refused. We need to tell the local authorities to back away and to let people get their properties done up so they can be made available. This initiative needs to come from the Government and the Minister and we cannot be dilly-dallying with this. There must also be an easing of regulations, because this is one of the biggest stumbling blocks when people are trying to build out projects, especially in cities.

Rural towns must also be considered. It would be remiss of me not to mention the residential zoned land tax being brought in. In my constituency of Galway East, there are many rural towns, including Tuam, Gort, Loughrea and Athenry. The Minister will know them. Land in those areas is being farmed and is part of a functional farm but it has been zoned R1, as it is called, for residential development, or even R2. A tax is being applied to this land even though it is part of a functioning family farm. It is outrageous that we would put a value on this land, first of all, and then put a tax on it. This land will never be available for sale because it is being used. It is not being hoarded but used for the purpose of farming in this country. We must stand up here and say it is absolutely rubbish if any tax is applied to that type of land.

It is important that we take this for what it is worth. There is an opportunity to ensure vacant properties are brought back into use. We must ensure as well that they are brought back into use in a way that will revive our towns, villages and rural areas. Equally, the county development plans are going against the concept of family members building on their own family farms. We have the likes of TII making rules and regulations governing who can build where. We must decide who is actually in charge. All over my constituency, I have heard of cases where the sons and daughters of farmers want to build on their own land and they are being refused planning permission because they would be coming out an exit that perhaps might currently be from a farm yard. Now that a house is going to be built that will use that entrance as well, however, it is being regarded as creating much more of a danger. We must get ourselves back to reality. We have to allow people to live where they should live. This has been proved by the European courts. The European Court of Justice has said this. We need, therefore, to have free movement of people. One thing we must ensure in this regard is that we have proper and affordable planning processes in rural areas.

We now move into the question-and-answer session. I call Deputy Carthy.

Irish citizens in Sudan have been encouraged to register with the embassy in Kenya, which is accredited to Sudan. Can the Minister of State give us a report on the estimated number of citizens who have registered, particularly in Khartoum? Could he outline what steps are being taken to ensure their safety and well-being at this time?

I raised a number of questions in my contribution earlier but I want to focus on one now. I am referring to the relaxation in the European Union of state aid rules, which has been taken advantage of overwhelmingly by Germany and France. Some 66% of all the applications approved by the Commission for relaxation of state aid rules were from those two countries. We do not want those with the deepest pockets to be able to distort the level playing field of European free trade. One area where we desperately need significant investment, which the Government said it will not make because of the restrictions on state aid rules, is our ports. If we are going to take advantage of the requirement to decarbonise our economy and build the offshore wind farms we are required to build to meet our targets by 2030, we need to invest in our ports now. Will the Minister of State ensure a formal application is made to the Commission to invest significantly, both from our own strategic investment bank and from the State directly, in ports? I am thinking particularly of Rosslare Europort, which is ready with a €200 million scheme to service our offshore wind needs. Otherwise, we will lose that opportunity to ports outside this jurisdiction.

There are two major issues here that have been caused by the Russian invasion of Ukraine, namely, food security and energy security. I ask for some sort of update on that. There was some conversation around food security and some people were pushing for leeway on certain sections of the sanctions but I want to know where that conversation is developing. I agree with what Deputy Howlin said. If we are going to get serious about energy security, it is all about wind power and renewables. We need to ensure we have the resources and facilities to deliver that. We all understand the necessity of keeping the pressure on in relation to Russian aggression but we also have to deal with the brutal right-wing Israeli Government involved in apartheid, racism and annexation. What conversations have happened at a European level, even if it is in a subpart of the EU, about calling out the Israelis and taking proper actions? Is there a conversation within Government about dealing with the occupied territories Bill, recognising the state of Palestine and moving on Deputy Brady's legislation to make it illegal for the Ireland Strategic Investment Fund, ISIF, to be a shareholder in companies that are involved in the illegal occupation of Palestinian lands?

I will reiterate some of the questions I asked earlier and speak to what Deputy Howlin said. He talked about the temporary state aid framework that is now in place to help European companies. That is partly a response to the Inflation Reduction Act in the US. I do not expect to hear from the Minister of State about any policy discussions he might have had with the American President last week but that is an absolutely crucial issue for European business, and particularly for Irish business, when it comes to decarbonising our economy. Last week we heard all about the investment US companies have made in Ireland but equally there is the investment Irish companies have made in the US. There is a quid pro quo there. We need to be sure that level of investment can continue.

About three weeks ago a delegation from Denmark came before the Joint Committee on European Union Affairs. They spoke to us about some of the challenges their small businesses are facing when it comes to the Inflation Reduction Act in the US and the impact that will have on European business. They felt Denmark and Ireland were similar sized countries and that many of our businesses here would face the same type of challenges. Very specifically, how proactive is the Government being to ensure Irish businesses can avail of any of the benefits that might come their way through the state aid framework or the new Net-Zero Industry Act? Is the Government working proactively with industry to ensure that?

My other question does not relate to the European Council but at the end of the day, the Minister of State and I know that if Europe is to mean anything to people, it has to mean something to them today. We can talk about the Inflation Reduction Act and whatever and most people will not know what it means. It is crucial but they still will not know what it means. However, they know what it means if they decide to avail of the cross-border healthcare directive and come across the kind of intransigence from the HSE - not all the time but sometimes - regarding reimbursement of their costs. I do not need to tell the Minister of State anything. He has seen, or heard about, the Ombudsman's report. It is quite damning in many ways. The HSE simply makes it difficult for people and the very opposite should be the case. I asked this in my original intervention and I am asking again. The Ombudsman made quite a significant number of recommendations. Will the Government take these on board? I do not want just a "Yes" or "No" answer. When will it take them on board? How will it change things? I do not expect a full answer today but what I would like is a fulsome approach to what the Ombudsman said and a statement from the Government that it is going to listen and act.

I believe the motion would give the State even more planning powers over people's private property rights. It is as simple as that. We could look at many other areas. I appreciate the right of the Social Democrats to bring forward this motion. Why do we not look, however, at the more than 4,000, which is a conservative figure, empty local authority houses that have been there for decades? All of us know if we go into any of the estates in our towns and villages that we will see houses that have been boarded up for years, and decades in some cases. We must tackle these. I believe this is a very dangerous road to go down. I want to get houses sorted, but it looks like the State and the Government do not. It looks like paper is being pushed around and back and forward and we get no houses built. We talk the talk, as Deputy Verona Murphy said earlier. It is time for this fiddling while Rome burns to stop. Let us put our shoulder to the wheel and not bring forward motions here to outclass other parties on the left to try to see what they will or will not do. Some of the parties on the left have been in government and they did not produce many houses. It is not a simple issue and I am not saying that; I am saying, though, that this is a slippery slope that we are going down when we talk about taking people's houses.

For various reasons, and we all see them, there could be major complications involved, including in the land registry, in wills, in people being ill in nursing homes or whatever. It is not as simple as just being able to empty buildings. It is not about being able to use the postman, fear an phoist, to spot empty buildings. There is a great deal behind every story in this regard and we must respect that. We must respect private property. People who own private properties bought them and paid their taxes. They bought them, paid for them and maintained them. For some reason, then, these buildings are empty and that could be because of mental health issues or a plethora of other issues. I would love to see all these buildings being used as well, but we must work within the law and give no more draconian powers to the State to dictate to people who had the energy, enthusiasm and focus to house themselves. They should be left alone. Let us look at the State's empty properties first, and they are many.

In County Kerry, which I represent, we have 172 voids, which are empty houses. Why are these not being tackled and put into use? When local authority houses become available, why are they not put back into use within, at the most, a month? Houses like that should be turned around in five to six weeks and new people should be put into them. Deputies in this Dáil attack property owners. I have heard more rubbish in here today from people who are serial objectors themselves. They have objected to thousands of houses being built in their constituencies. We have one lady in this Chamber who has objected to 5,000 houses in the short time she has been a Deputy. It is insanity of the worse type. Why? It is because they are being built by the private sector and maybe somebody will make a profit. My good God, is there anything in the world wrong with a person making a profit? Is there anything in the world wrong with people having a house? It is their property. They might have worked hard for it. If somebody inherits a house, am I seriously being told there is a desire to increase a tax by 33 times to 10% of the valuation of the property? If implemented, this would mean that in the context of the average vacant home, using the average home price example of €320,000, a vacant home tax of €32,000 would end up being paid annually if the Social Democrats got its way. That is insanity of the worst type.

We also have to improve the road infrastructure. Regarding the offshore renewable projects, there are more than 36 new projects that are either in design or final stages. Half of them are in the Irish Sea. It is critical to meeting our obligations and reaching our target of 80% renewable energy by 2030 that we have the necessary infrastructure in the port. As I said before in this House, we have updated our legislation to provide for the planning and consent process around delivery of offshore renewable infrastructure. The maritime area regulatory authority, MARA, having its headquarters in Wexford will be a key instrument in adjudicating on all those consents, which are going to be very important. Seven times our landmass is offshore. It is one of those key areas that could be a huge benefit for this country into the future. We look forward to delivering on those aspirations. We will do all we can to accelerate that infrastructure because it is of vital importance.

Deputy Howlin asked detailed questions about state aid. Deputy Christopher O'Sullivan also mentioned it, as did Deputy Harkin, who also raised the Inflation Reduction Act. There are huge discussions going on around both pieces of legislation, that is, the critical infrastructure Bill and the zero-emissions Bill, and what the detail of those two key instruments is going to be. In all of the bilateral engagements I have had since being appointed Minister of State with responsibility for European affairs, I have raised the need for any changes in the Single Market or state aid rules to first be evidence-based. Impact assessments must be carried out to ensure smaller open economies are not adversely affected by such changes.

Second, in terms of our infrastructure and ability to process these large-scale applications, it is very difficult in that countries like France and Germany have a huge advantage. They have the industrial base to reabsorb the investment needed to deliver these high-scale projects. We have a huge amount of work to do. We will continue to work to ensure Ireland's voice is heard. We have built a coalition with a number of countries to ensure we get conclusions into the summit statement, when it is published at the end of the European Council meeting, to ensure that we have assessments that are fair and that we do not endorse a runaway train where Ireland could be adversely affected. Investment into our country, and indeed many industries here, could be affected by this as well, so it is very much at the forefront of our minds.

Deputy Berry raised the €1.8 billion of assets seized by the Central Bank and the competent authorities here from Russia. I am advised that ensuring those assets are used for constructing Ukraine is a very complex process. Ireland has given a significant donation of over €3 million to the International Criminal Court, ICC. That is where work will have to be done on how we put that money to best use and on whether there is a mechanism to achieve that in rebuilding Ukraine. I am aware of correspondence the Taoiseach has had with the President of Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelenskyy. One of the key things said by President Zelenskyy is that he really needs money for the SME sector to rebuild Ukraine. That is going to be a massive challenge into the future.

Obviously, the Black Sea grain initiative has been raised by a number of Deputies and there is an uncertainty as to the duration of the deal that was hammered out. We are very supportive of it because it is key for food security. There is a big challenge because we do not want to see the sanctions that are being brought in throughout Europe being weaponised and used against food security. It is very welcome that David O'Sullivan has now been appointed as the special envoy to deal with third countries. I hope we will see a situation whereby food is in no way impacted by any sanctions brought in. That is key.

Deputy Harkin referred to the cross-border directive. I have not read the Ombudsman's report yet but I will raise this matter with the Taoiseach in relation to his work on the European summit and I will revert back to the Deputy.

The current and worsening situation with regard to the plight of the Palestinian people has been mentioned a number of times. The programme for Government committed to recognising "the State of Palestine as part of a lasting settlement of the conflict, or in advance of that, when we believe doing so will progress efforts to reach a two-state solution or protect the integrity of Palestinian territory”. The last portion of the commitment is particularly important because the Israeli Government is systematically going about attempts to bring-----

I have three other questions to get to. Will the Deputy ask his question?

When will the Government recognise the state of Palestine? Can the Minister of State outline what particular efforts are being made at an EU level by the Government in this regard?

I will follow up on that. It is a fair point. Is it possible to have that conversation at an EU Council level? If it is not possible to have that conversation even among some of the states across the European Union, Ireland will have to do an element of heavy lifting in relation to supporting the Palestinians. That will mean progressing the occupied territories Bill, recognising the state of Palestine and dealing with the issue as regards the Ireland Strategic Investment Fund. Allowing the fund to be a shareholder in companies that are involved in illegal settlements is utterly unacceptable to the Irish people.

First, I agree with that. There may be a need for a particular debate on the Palestinian issue because of the nature of the new Israeli Government, which is the most right-wing in Israel's history with the ensuing consequences.

On the impact of the issue of grain exports, I raised its impact on Africa in my contribution. It is absolutely vital that grain is exported from Ukraine. I am a bit intrigued by the decisions of Poland, Slovakia and Czechia to halt imports of Ukrainian grain because of the impact it is having on their own domestic markets. Will the Minister of State explain exactly how it could be that grain from Ukraine is being prevented from entering the European Union by member states?

On this occasion, the Deputy did not.

Deputy Healy-Rae did not-----

Sin deireadh anois le ráitis maidir leis an gcruinniú den Chomhairle Eorpach a bhí ar siúl ar an 23 Márta 2023.