Mr. Colm Forde:

I thank the Senator. I will try to capture as much of that as I possibly can. We referenced already that the negotiations are confidential in nature, so I ask her to please bear that in mind as I try to address her questions.

What the Senator did not reference in her comments on the risk-based approach and the focus on tier 1 was that plausible information piece. While you would go to tier 1 on risk-based assessment, if the company that is in scope is made aware of plausible information regarding any due diligence concerns at any other area down the supply chain, then it has to act on that. It is not just limited to tier 1. Companies have to be proactive as far as tier 1 and where they become aware of information outside of tier 1, they are obliged to act on that. That would be subject to oversight and regulation by whoever the national competent authorities would be.

On the Senator's view on whether this reduces regulatory burden, the whole policy ambition behind this and the reason the Minister is so supportive of the omnibus proposal is the fact that the perception is it will reduce administrative burden. We outlined at length throughout the discussions how companies in the value chain, only as far as tier 1, will be required to provide that information in terms of the CSDDD. The companies that are in scope will be limited in the information they can seek for companies with less than 500 employees. It will reduce the administrative burden on the supply chain. On the CSRD, we have spoken about how the companies in scope cannot ask for information above and beyond the voluntary reporting standards. In our view, that is a clear reduction in administrative burden for SMEs and the supply chain.

The Senator referenced EU civil liability versus national liability. Two issues are at play there. Access to justice and civil liability would still exist either under the current directive or in the omnibus proposal. The question is whether it is EU-wide and consistent across Europe or whether it is different depending on which jurisdiction you are in. I mentioned the Draghi report. One of the criticisms that Mario Draghi highlighted was that fragmentation throughout the Single Market, the different regulatory regimes and different jurisdictions. Ireland is very supportive of reducing misalignment across the Single Market, so that it is easier for businesses to operate in it and for everyone to comply with their obligations. Ireland is more favourable towards that EU civil liability piece.

I also mentioned the climate action plans. Again, we do not view the CSDDD as replacing any other obligations or commitments that companies are subject to under national or European law. I referenced the fact that-----