Maureen O'Sullivan (Dublin Central, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I will be brief. I was in Iveagh House yesterday where there were positive events to learn about overseas development assistance, ODA. It was good to see a comment in one of the opening speeches in the book, that the Overseas Development Institute has recognised Ireland as the most effective donor in reaching those in extreme poverty. That is very positive. The Minister referred to climate change causing displacement. We are aware of that, but there is another displacement that is not on the agenda where it should be, which is the displacement that arises from multinationals, transnationals and the land grabs that are taking place. I returned from Iveagh House yesterday to chair a meeting for Trócaire in the audiovisual room. Abelino Chub Caal, a human rights defender from Guatemala who was recently released from prison after serving a few years for defending his community, was present. He was in Ireland to receive the Óscar Romero Award. We also had Naw Pe Tha Law from Myanmar. The common denominator is that they are trying to protect the land from transnational and multinational companies that have carte blanche to do what they like.

That brings me to one of my favourite topics, business and human rights, our national plan and the UN plan. I was taken aback to learn that Ireland is not keen to agree to a legally binding plan. Unless it is legally binding, these corporations will be able to do what they like in countries in South America and Africa. The EU's private sector is becoming more involved in Africa. It is seen as a way to help Africa, as the Minister said. There is a big push on trade with China, and there is no need to mention some of the working conditions there. I attended the recent launch of a report by Church in Chains and it was appalling to learn about what is happening there. Last week, Senator Lawless and I had an interesting discussion with the Shura Council from Saudi Arabia about how migrants are treated in Middle Eastern countries. All of that brings me to my first question. Why is Ireland not supporting a legally binding UN treaty on business and human rights?

Second, I have attended some of the Common Security and Defence Policy, CSDP, meetings that have been held and there is no doubt that there is a growing militarisation agenda in Europe. I partly understand it for some countries, particularly the Baltic countries and countries in eastern Europe. Our committee visited Georgia so we see the fear that exists of further aggression by Russia. However, I do not believe militarisation is the answer in these situations. That leads me to continuing the exchange we had on the European peace facility. There are questions about that. It is fine in theory, but transparency and accountability are not obvious so there are concerns about that. Will proposals go to national parliaments or, for example, to our committee? Is there a guarantee that peace-building alternatives will be considered first? Do we know that the list of eligible equipment will exclude lethal weapons?

Deputy Crowe mentioned Palestine. I want to deal with another angle, the national state law, which is that the country is Jewish and democratic. How can the rights of Palestinian people be recognised if that is what the Government is saying about the state? I am aware of the Tánaiste's interest in this and the procedure he is following. He said that things are said in the heat of an election. However, settlements are continuing outside the heat of an election. He has seen this and so have I. I have been there. The Green Line is gone. We are doing a disservice and being disrespectful to the Palestinian people in continuing to talk about the two-state solution when everybody knows that it is not viable. It is becoming less and less viable as more settlements are built.

My final question is on our humanitarian assistance to Syria. How is that disbursed?