A/HRC/31/50 (c) Other documents — including a concept note, a list of panellists and their curricula vitae, a list of participants, contributions from States and other relevant stakeholders — were made available to the working group through its website.2 D. Adoption of the agenda and programme of work 12. In her opening statement, the Chair-Rapporteur thanked all the members of the working group for her nomination as Chair-Rapporteur and welcomed the encouraging remarks towards the working group. She also noted that, after the adoption of the programme of work, there would be an opportunity to make general statements. She also noted that there would then be a number of panel discussions, each of which would be on a thematic issue, according to the proposed programme of work. She further noted that, after each discussion, there would be an opportunity for comments from political and regional groups, States, intergovernmental organizations, national human rights institutions and civil society. Participants were invited to share their views on the theme of the discussion and ask panellists questions on their specific area of expertise. The Chair-Rapporteur informed the participants that the final report would include summaries of the debate, summaries of the discussions and recommendations by the working group. The Chair-Rapporteur noted that, before the session, she had conducted intensive consultations with delegations, regional and political groups and informal bilateral meetings, and that she looked forward to a fruitful discussion, based on the various views of the participants. The ChairRapporteur also noted that the programme of work had been presented with enough time and further bolstered by contributions of States in a way that did not affect the mandate or preclude the basis for consensus. The Chair-Rapporteur underlined the basic principles for conducting the session of the working group, namely, transparency, inclusiveness and democracy. 13. The Chair-Rapporteur asked if there were any comments on the programme of work. The European Union noted that, in its resolution 26/22, the Human Rights Council had provided a solid and robust work plan. While recalling its position regarding resolution 26/9, the European Union presented two proposals on the draft to the programme of work when it had been first circulated on 12 June 2015. First, to add a first panel discussion entitled “Implementation of the Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights – a renewed commitment by all States” as a way to reiterate the commitment to implement the principles. Second, to add the word “all” before the words “business enterprises” throughout the programme of work, but without changing the title, in line with resolution 26/9. The latter proposal was made because the European Union considered that the discussion could not be limited to transnational corporations as many abuses were committed by enterprises at the domestic level. Those proposals were supported by two delegations. 14. Several delegations noted their concern with regard to the suggested substantive proposed changes by the European Union, because they considered that it amounted to amending resolution 26/9 and went further than the mandate of the working group. They affirmed that they were ready to adopt the programme of work as it had been proposed by the Chair-Rapporteur. A number of delegations also argued that resolution 26/9 was clear, did not need further clarification and did not apply to national companies. They also highlighted that paragraphs 1, 3 and 5 of the resolution clearly defined the scope and nature of the discussions and that it would be inappropriate to amend the programme of work to say “all” because it was not featured in the mandate. A number of delegations noted that 2 www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/HRC/WGTransCorp/Pages/IGWGOnTNC.aspx. 5