There seems to be remarkable consensus in the House today but I would like to make a few points. Here in the Parliament trade in the Middle East has always been a political flashpoint. We are major donors but we have, unfortunately been marginalised in terms of policy and political influence for too long in the Middle East and we can contribute positively, as many speakers have said today, just as we did in the case of Northern Ireland. We are major consumers of goods from both Israel and the occupied territories, indeed trade is probably our main political strength in the area and ensuring the promotion of the rule of law is our best political asset as we seek to contribute to the peace settlement. Borders are being shut down, sometimes arbitrarily, and sometimes following a terrorist attack. On one of my many visits to the area, I have seen flowers and strawberries rotting, lying in the streets of Gaza and being eaten by the donkeys while their Palestinian producers look on helplessly in despair. But it is not just an issue of closed borders. Goods do flow freely from these territories, goods produced in Israeli settlements in the occupied territories. We have an international agreement and it is being transgressed. It is our responsibility to ensure that the terms of the agreement are respected and upheld by all. Under the circumstances, when Israel does not clearly discharge its duty to apply the origin rules and the territorial clause of the agreement as it should, the Commission is encouraging Member States to resort to the import verification procedures which can be dilatory and evasive. Israeli customs can be given a very long time, up to ten months, to reply to any queries and the import verification procedure can be totally unproductive. We should be requiring deposits on all goods imported from Israel until we are able to ensure that Israel will stop abusing the agreement. I have a couple of questions, Commissioner. Has the Commission received from any Member States’ customs services documents certified by Israeli customs that represent specific settlement locations in the occupied territories falling within the scope of the agreement? Has it directly asked the Israeli officials responsible whether its customs service applies the territorial clause so as to exclude the occupied territories from the agreement and has it determined that Israel correctly understands and interprets that territorial clause? And is the Commission aware whether they apply that territorial clause correctly or not? Finally, the Commission has already stated that action to uphold international agreements with the EU, and I am quoting, “does not represent a sanction against Israel but demands correct implementation of existing agreements freely entered into by the parties”. In short, Commissioner, this is not an issue which should be treated as a matter for peace-process-related political debate. It is, in fact, an international agreement and a trade agreement. Could I just finally express my great hopes for the peace process in that area – a part of the world that so desperately needs it – so that it can re-group and re-form and help its millions of under-privileged and poverty-stricken citizens.

Political group: PPE-DE