Del Rio (EESC): Unlock EU due diligence, supply chain SMEs risk dying

Brussels – Some call it the “European bubble:” it is where decisions that matter are made, where one can have a broad view and big goals. This bubble, however, often clashes with reality. So it happens that the green deal is seen as an obstacle to development and, in some cases, also to jobs. The challenge is to find a compromise.

For example, abandoning coal in Tusk’s Poland has been seen in Warsaw as an axe on thousands of workers. “Even our Polish trade unionists are asking us how to deal with all the workers,” said Cinzia Del Rio, President of the Employment, Social Affairs and Citizenship section of the EESC and head of European policies at UIL interviewed on the sidelines of Civil Social Week underway in Brussels.

Eunews: How to support workers without backing down on the Green Deal?

Del Rio: The issue is not revising the environmental goals, because Europe has already discussed and shared the targets. The issue is how we accompany this transition process. It is about making choices for politicies and resources. For reconversion, accompanying people with wages, with income support, but also updating professions.

E.: For businesses, the Due Diligence agreement seemed to be closed, then it fell through. Is it is still being discussed. What happened?

D.R.: It is beginning to be perceived that too much social regulation harms businesses. It also applies to the platform, to the right to disconnect, several measures were supposed to be adopted in the previous term that were blocked by many cross vetoes. The French and German governments pushed hard on due diligence, because they have national legislation with stringent standards and criteria. They would like others to comply. Italy agreed, but this year abstained, preventing a majority from forming. There is still hope.

E.: What is the risk for businesses?

D.R.: Dying SMEs in supply chains. Because big companies go where regulations are not stringent, you don’t pay contributions, there are fewer protections. This is an issue we had worked a lot on, and there was consensus. We are talking about minimum rights: not about wages, not about health and safety, but about minimum rights to adhere to when companies go to third countries. When we give ourselves ambitious goals in Europe, it is not clear why we can then go to a third country and exploit the land, not taking into account minimum environmental standards.

E.: Farmers take to the streets, talk of ideological environmental choices and demand a hearing on the new CAP.

D.R.: On agriculture, we cannot question the green deal. What we need to revisit are the accompanying policies. We cannot think that 80 percent of CAP subsidies go to 20 percent of the enterprises. That is unacceptable; it has to be distributed fairly to the whole supply chain. We have all been affected by the tractors in the streets. the question is: is it necessary to slow down the transition? It is not about slowing down. It is about accompanying the process.

E.: The Spanish and Belgian EU Council presidencies have been pro-social. The next ones, especially the Hungarian one, may not have ambitious social agendas. Are you concerned about this?

D.R.: We are very concerned from the labor point of view. And I come back to due diligence: from a labor perspective, it’s not just an ethical issue. It’s a question of the survival of businesses. With the new Parliament, do we think that everything will come to a halt? It is a risk.