EU Matrix Atlas › Policy topic
EU Policy Topic · ATLAS

Due diligence in supply chains (environmental and human rights)

Score 0-20: Statement openly defends CSDDD as adopted (or calls to strengthen it) and attacks Omnibus weakening as deregulation: defends civil liability with broad standing, defends full value-chain coverage including tier-2+, opposes scope-threshold increases, denounces simplification as 'pure deregulation' / 'chainsaw' / 'impunity'. Often emotional language naming named harms (child labour in mining, forced labour in Xinjiang, fruit pickers in Morocco, fossil fuel industry backing). Anchors: 13823 Aubry, 5355 Matthieu, 16895 Chaibi, 26962 Ceulemans, 4216 Lange, 5314 Wolters, 5290 Bischoff, 8156 Repasi (corrected). Score 21-40: Substantively defends CSDDD core (scope, value-chain, liability) but allows technical/administrative simplification; or focuses on a single sub-aspect (e.g., reporting harmonisation, mirror clauses, double materiality narrative-data, traceability) without challenging the regime. Includes substantive MEP questions to Commission pushing for stricter enforcement. Anchors: 19436 Repasi (corrected, S&D shadow), 13928 Wolters (corrected, rapporteur scope concerns), 11138 Lange (corrected, scope-reduction-vs-objectives question), 18719 Andrews (CSDDD journalism + responsible disengagement). Score 41-60: Genuine balance — speaker explicitly engages BOTH poles (defends some elements + names some concessions), advocates no specific tilting measure, and is not deferring. RARE: should be <= 5% of surviving rows on a real polarising trade-off. Anti-example: 'we support the framework but call for SME caps / tech-neutrality / civil-liability removal' — score on substance (61-80), not on framing. Stewardship-of-Omnibus rapporteur summaries (rapporteur listing diverging amendments) sit at 60. Anchors: 19433 Warborn (rapporteur stewardship summary), 8165 Canfin (SME-shield calibration). Score 61-80: Substantively supports Omnibus simplification — SME shields, narrow tier-1 cap, raise scope thresholds, scale back civil liability, harmonisation framed as simplification — but stops short of full repeal. Anchors: 8163 Canfin (tier-1 simplification, 'let's not be ideological'), 8164 Canfin (corrected, civil-liability harmonisation = simplification), 11129 Hahn ('we're not achieving competitiveness by overregulation'), 11135 Warborn (corrected, rapporteur harmonisation+timetable question), 11123 Aaltola (Omnibus 'critical and strategic'), 5384 Ferber (corrected, 'CSDDD not serviceable, more ambition needed'), 5390 Ruissen (exempt SMEs, Omnibus 'correction we were looking for'), 19780 Donazzan (simplification = reviewing CSDDD because it sends companies out of Europe). Score 81-100: Calls for full repeal of CSDDD/CSRD or wholesale gutting; framed as 'true simplification = deregulation'. Anchors: 13815 Pimpie ('repeal both CSRD and CSDDD'), 8158 Piera ('delete reporting requirements and due diligence requirements'), 13817 Crosetto ('completely get rid of due diligence obligations'), 8174 Niebler (hard-simplification questions framed around bureaucracy + legal certainty + competitiveness).

How positions are measured

One poleWe must keep (or strengthen) the 2024 CSDDD as adopted: broad value-chain coverage including tier-2+ suppliers, civil liability with effective standing, low scope thresholds, and robust enforcement aligned with international best practice (UNGPs, OECD MNE Guidelines). Reject Omnibus simplification proposals as 'deregulation' that weakens accountability for environmental and human-rights harms in third-country supply chains.
Other poleWe must simplify or scale back binding due-diligence obligations on EU companies' supply chains: narrow the value-chain scope to direct (tier-1) suppliers, raise revenue/employee thresholds so the regime covers fewer companies, weaken or remove civil-liability provisions, postpone application, and where feasible repeal the directive. Trust to voluntary disclosure, market discipline, and SME relief, on the grounds that the current framework imposes disproportionate compliance burdens and undermines EU competitiveness.

Legislative files on this topic (1)

See where policymakers stand on this topic →
© EU Matrix · atlas.eumatrix.app · Sign in for the full analysis: where each MEP, group and government stands on this axis.