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

I am sharing time with Deputy Clare Daly.

When speaking last week prior to the European Council meeting, I made the point that it was strange that there are so many humanitarian crises in the world that the Council is not addressing. I had the opportunity a few days ago to meet parliamentarians from Yemen. I listened to them on the effects of the three-year war on their country. They referred to suffering, destruction and devastation in addition to a lack of water and electricity and very poor access to medical services. They referred to the shutdown of the media. There is one newspaper left out of 300 that existed before the war. There are also threats to parliamentarians. The parliamentarians to whom I spoke made the point very strongly that there is a need for the UN Security Council and the European Council to take a much stronger stance.

Let me turn to the sustainable development goals. One hundred and ninety-three countries, in Europe and outside it, have signed up to the goals but not one of them can be achieved in a conflict zone. Therefore, the implementation of the goals means standing up to and confronting the arms industry. Hypocritically, countries that signed up to the goals are selling arms to countries that also signed up to them. Those arms are fuelling and exacerbating conflict in so many countries. It means that the goals cannot be implemented. Some $100 billion is spent on the nuclear arms budget. What could be achieved if this were used to address humanitarian issues?

The European Council meeting was about the Single Market, trade, trade deals and how Europe will pursue a robust trade policy. Last week, the Taoiseach referred to global tax reform in his speech. I looked for a reference in the conclusions and could not find anything on it. Maybe it is there somewhere. Likewise, I looked for a reference to the human rights aspect of business and trade. I attended a seminar at the Irish Centre for Human Rights in NUI Galway on the national action plans on business. The point was being made strongly by the speakers that Europe had been a leader on the national action plans, which are about implementing the UN guiding principles on business and human rights. EU leadership is sadly lacking, however, and it is falling behind. It has become somewhat complacent. That was obvious from the European Council meeting.

Despite all the discussion about trade and the Single Market, there was no discussion on the rights of workers. At the conference, the point was certainly made that there is a need for corporate transparency, corporate liability and access to justice. There is fear that the national action plans on business and human rights are getting lost in the discussion on the sustainable development goals but surely they should be complementary, especially when we are looking at private enterprise being involved in implementing the goals. There is a really serious lack of justice for workers working for European companies outside Europe. It is impossible for them to gain access to justice. We see this particularly in the extractive industries but also in others. There are some victims who have been waiting for 30 or 40 years for justice. That leads to the conclusion that there is a need for mandatory human rights due diligence when it comes to business.

The European Council condemned the use of chemical weapons and it also condemned the attack on Salisbury but it then agreed with the UK Government's assessment to the effect that it is highly likely that the Russian Federation is responsible. That is a very dangerous precedent on which to make decisions. It is extremely difficult to understand why Ireland made the decision it made on intelligence from the UK. Is there some reason we believe the UK rather than anybody else? It has not exactly been telling the truth on many other issues. It is like the saying "Dúirt bean liom go ndúirt léi", which is not a constructive basis on which to make decisions. Perhaps Russia was responsible but there is a need for independent evidence in order to reach that conclusion. What is occurring is damaging the respect afforded to us internationally. Our reputation is being damaged, not to mention what our activity is signalling in terms of our neutrality, or so-called neutrality.

One of the conclusions from the Council meeting refers to closer co-operation between EU member states and with NATO. It is not enough to be making speeches about our neutrality that are not matched with actions regarding neutrality. We need only look at the figures we are getting from Shannonwatch regarding the use of Shannon Airport by the US military. We are being pushed, cajoled or lured - or whatever word one wants to use - into the military arena. Ireland will pay a very high price. We will pay a high price, particularly in the context of our reputation for humanitarian activity and securing human rights.

See this speech in context