Ms Evie Clarke:

I thank the Deputy for his astute remarks, which we take fully. Regarding whether the directive is strong enough, we are talking now about the original CSDDD. Looking back at that, we would say that it was not strong enough. It did not have all of the areas that we wanted to be included. There are certain key elements that should have been included and that we pushed to be strengthened during transposition once we got to that phase in Ireland. These includes widening the scope, ensuring that a gender-responsive lens is applied and ensuring the inclusion of certain key sectors, such as the full financial sector and the public sector. The problem is that we are not even at that point anymore. We have taken ten steps backwards and we are not even at that weakened version of the CSDDD that was originally agreed to. What is being proposed now is significantly weakened to the point where the directive almost becomes completely ineffective. As my colleagues already highlighted, this risk-based approach means that the most severe impacts that are found lower down in supply chains will just continue to go undetected. This includes women at the bottom of supply chains who are often disproportionately employed in the garment sector. It includes massive restrictions on access to justice for these victims and also all of the points that Mr. Fitzpatrick highlighted on climate transition plans. Instead of being at the point of where we were a few months ago, looking at the directive that had passed and having the opportunity to make an input into the decided directive and strengthen it during transposition in Ireland, we have taken a million steps backwards. Unfortunately, we are now at a very different point. No, it was not originally strong enough but we are at a much worse point at the moment.

I would like to make a brief point on SMEs, if I may. This is an important point that we need to make very clear. The initial CSDDD only applied to the very largest companies, those with more than 1,000 employees and €450 million in turnover. We believe that the scope should have been much broader. The very narrow limits were further reduced even towards the end of the negotiation process. As it stands, the CSDDD would only apply to 0.05% of companies.

Regarding SMEs, they are not included at all in the CSDDD. A European Commission study found that, for SMEs, the additional recurrent company-level costs would be approximately 0.41% of their revenue and only 0.009% for larger companies.

For a company with a revenue of approximately €1 million per year, that would only amount to less than €1,000 per year.

To clarify some of the points on what the omnibus would change for SMEs, and some of my colleagues will probably want to come in on this, there is evidence to suggest that what the omnibus would bring about would massively complicate matters for and put additional requirements on SMEs, increasing those costs. This is because it would remove essential protections that companies are supposed to help their suppliers with. I can go into the specifics on that, but my colleagues might have some specific examples they would like to add.