Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2016-01-20-Speech-3-837-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20160120.34.3-837-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, as the rapporteur on corporate responsibility, I hope the forthcoming session of the UN Human Rights Council and this Parliament’s delegation to it will continue to advance the priority given to business and human rights.
As paragraph 28 of our resolution makes clear, this Parliament believes the European Union and its Member States should engage constructively in the intergovernmental working group on a legally-binding instrument. Previously the EU left the room after the first day, which I understand may be subject to some criticism in the report of the UN working group, which is due to be presented in March. Preventing and boycotting a human rights mechanism is not where Europe should be.
Our resolution makes clear that taking part in what is an open-ended working group is not an alternative to the Accountability and Remedy Project of the High Commissioner on domestic law remedies, nor is it an alternative to promoting the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, to which the EU Member States could demonstrate their commitment by completing the process and agreeing national action plans.
I understand the EU may even be considering a resolution in Geneva criticising the UN working group. This is the path of confrontation with which this Parliament cannot agree.
For my Group, I do not agree with all of the proposals being discussed in the working group. For example, I believe human rights should apply to all business and not just the transnational corporations. But surely Europe must be in the room to diplomatically express our disagreement and to demonstrate to others what we so often say to them: to be prepared to listen to different views.
And the final part of what I want to say: I will respond to what my friend and colleague, Mr Preda, says about paragraph 89. He makes it a key vote, and his Group says they will vote against the resolution if it fails. What does that paragraph say? It supports compliance with international humanitarian law and international human rights law; it calls for the viability of the two-state solution; and it calls for support for the special rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories. I say to him and his Group, in all truth: we have a consensus about moving forward on Middle East peace. We believe that voting for those principles is right to get peace between Israel and Palestine. If he and his Group choose to disagree on that in the course of this resolution, they are wrong."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples