Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees

Thursday, 14 November 2019

Joint Oireachtas Committee on Foreign Affairs and Trade, and Defence

Business and Human Rights: Discussion

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

It is so good that the three witnesses are here to present, and I acknowledge the work all three have done.

It is obvious that the awards that Front Line Defenders give every year, and in which some of us are involved, really highlight the difficulties and challenges human rights defenders face. The point has been made that the awards and nominations create an awareness and perhaps a somewhat safer environment because the world is watching. Most recently we met Abelino Chub Caal, who received the Romero award, through Trócaire. These are small drops in a very big ocean but are excellent initiatives.

It presents a stark reality of life for human rights defenders, as well as the absolute need that human rights for business have to be legally binding with mandatory due diligence. There is no question about that. It is disappointing that the baseline assessment from our group is mainly voluntary and the recommendations are not binding.

On Tuesday, I asked a parliamentary question of the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade on this issue and in his response, he stated the recommendations made will be considered by the business and human rights implementation group and there is a suggestion that consideration be given to the adoption of mandatory human rights due diligence. Using the term “consideration” is a bit weak. We need the language to be stronger than that. When I asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade on Trócaire’s suggestion about consultation, he said, “My Department has undertaken to convene a forum on business and human rights within two years of adoption of the plan." That is ludicrous.

Ms Lawlor's report, which I saw last Friday, is comprehensive. It is also damning of companies in this country. It is indicative that lipservice has been paid in some cases and in others it is not even lipservice. On the corporate human rights benchmark methodology which Ms Lawlor used, did she engage with our national plan? It took a long time to come and there has been much disappointment with it because it was a watered-down version of what it should have been. Is there any sort of engagement there? Ms Lawlor is showing the way forward. How are we going to get there? The Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade said on Tuesday that the implementation group met three times but it is very quiet. It is not out there telling those companies what they need to do. How confident is Ms Lawlor that our national plan and our implementation group are robust enough to bring about real difference? At the recent meeting of the UN intergovernmental working group, the point was made that Spain and France made interventions but Ireland was quiet. I got the impression from the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade that he wants to be more proactive. What is keeping him away from that? Will we get to the ten features outlined in the position paper of the European Coalition for Corporate Justice, ECCJ?

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.