THE DAIL accepted an EU agreement to strengthen political and economic ties with Israel by 65 votes to 10. The Progressive Democrats rejected the agreement and a number of deputies expressed concern about Israel's human rights situation and its economic blockade of the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

Deputies also accepted economic and political agreements with Slovenia, Uzbekistan and Morocco.

Opening the debate, Tanaiste, Mr Spring, said EU agreements with Mediterranean countries including Morocco and Israel, supported them "in their efforts to progressively transform their region into a zone of peace, stability and prosperity".

The agreement with Slovenia recognised its "wish to play a full part in the process of European integration, while the agreement with Uzbekistan was a partnership and co-operation agreement and as such assisted it in meeting the challenges of fundamental, political and economic reform."

Mr Spring focused on the Euro-Mediterranean agreement with Israel. He said it would provide a framework for political dialogue and economic co-operation. It also underscored the EU's commitment to the Middle East peace process which, he said, was a long term exercise.

"It requires courage on all sides and the EU has to undertake measures which will help to ensure the success of the Middle East peace process."

He also believed the agreement would help Israel to feel less threatened by and more at ease with its neighbours. The success of the agreement would fundamentally depend on Israel's lasting commitment to the peace process and on its "upholding of acceptable standards in human rights and humanitarian law".

The Tanaiste stressed the EU's total opposition to Israel's settlement policy and said settlements in Jerusalem were a particular concern. Denial of Palestinian political rights "is matched on the economic front by its continuing draconian blockade of Gaza and the West Bank".

The EU was also concerned at continuing incidents of unlawful imprisonment, torture and ill treatment of detainees which were contrary to the UN Convention against torture.

Rejecting the agreement, Mr Des O'Malley, the Progressive Democrats spokesman on foreign affairs, said the EU "could not have it both ways". Europe could not condemn Israel's human rights situation on the one hand and then "pat it on the head" for its policies.

Mr O'Malley, who called the vote, asked the House to "decline to ratify this agreement until such time as Israel acts in a more reasonable way towards the Palestinian people and honours its obligations under the Oslo accord and international law."

He said accepting the agreement would he construed as indifference by this country to human rights. "Israel has infinitely more to gain from this agreement than the EU has and from its position of strength Europe should be seen to insist on the vindication of the rights of the Palestinian people who are now so grossly downtrodden by their oppressors".

Mr O'Malley also expressed concern at the human rights situation in Morocco but said he would not vote against that agreement.

Mr Alan Shatter (FG, Dublin South) described much of the debate as emotive and partisan. He said. "It ill behoves any member of a European parliament to condemn the Israelis as if they are the only ones causing difficulties".

He added. "We should be wary of lecturing others about their peace process when we can't get our own in order."

Mr Shatter said he did not regard as acceptable some of the methods used by Israel when holding people in detention, neither did he agree with the methods used by the Palestinians when they detained suspects.

"Let us not pretend that all the fault and difficulties are on one side and none on the other."