We can see clearly now the rain has gone ☀️
Five things are happening, according to the Cambridge Institute for Sustainability Leadership (CISL):
1) An active opposition working to stall progress, driven by a powerful coalition closely aligned with the current US administration
2) Inertia and complacency from businesses and politicians focused on the immediate costs of the transition while ignoring the far greater costs of inaction
3) A lack of trust and engagement from citizens
4) Complexity and competing priorities and
5) Fragmentation and flawed approaches, driven by competing agendas, lack of accountability, greenwashing, internal rivalry and a fixation on technicalities over progress
Eight challenges are making it a challenge for companies to respond to the climate and people crisis we are in, according to senior practitioners working in them ⏰💰:
1) Insufficient consideration given to ‘long term’ issues
2) Companies that are designed for hyper-efficiency in the short term - driving as hard a bargain as possible with a laser focus on short term production
3) Business that tell governments they can’t act alone and need regulation, while lobbying against meaningful policy and regulatory suggestions
4) Senior teams and boards that are not equipped for this and that prioritise quarterly reports, market share and year on year performance, to the detriment of issues that present a fundamental threat to operations in the mid-term
5) The competitive nature of companies that leads to superficial conversations in industry working groups and conferences
6) A bias toward pleasing and underplaying systemic risk for Directors, shareholders, owners and creditors, rather than being honest
7) Unsuitable auditing process with no meaningful scrutiny taking place
8) Legal teams unprepared for dealing with complex culpability and cumulative legal responsibility
We are stepping backwards. And yet, we are advancing.
Yes, both can be true at the same time.
We are not in denial. We see the world as it is—and we see the progress too.
We know what needs to happen. And, yes, you guessed it: the power lies in us. 💥
I’ve never felt our movement stronger than it is today.
It’s not the adversity itself—but how we respond—that will shape the world for the next generation of people, companies, and every living being. 🐾
A few updates on the Omnibus (EU CSDDD):
- End of June (23-24) will be the presentation of the draft Omnibus report in the EU Parliament on Legal Affairs (JURI). We will also see the publication of the European Council’s position. The final vote in JURI is scheduled for 13 October, followed by the fuller European Parliament vote.
This is then followed by the Trilogue (Parliament, Council & Commission). Who knows how long that will take (remember last year?) - could be a few months, leading to a final text mid-next year
- BusinesssEurope, which represents 42 national trade bodies across 36 countries, has issued its recent position. It points a finger at the problems of implementation that have arisen with the German supply chain law (LkSG), where conducting checks in every single direct business partner has been “counterproductive, inefficient and costly.”
When there is a need to go beyond Tier 1, they state the focus should be on the most severe and salient risks, rather than every single risk. BusinessEurope specifically backs international standards as they enable “companies to focus resources on the most severe impacts.” Hear hear! 👏
However, their refined position on the scope of due diligence is not all good news 🛑. A possible alternative they float to the concept of plausible information (the precise, relevant, factual and verifiable information standard in the Forced Labour Regulation) is completely unworkable. The standard for conducting meaningful due diligence is completely different than the standard used to prevent goods from accessing a market!
- OHCHR has just released its position on the Omnibus, flagging that shifting to a reactive approach to human rights due diligence beyond tier one could lead to more complicated and burdensome processes for companies, worse human rights outcomes, and an unfair shift of responsibility from business to civil society - in addition to representing a fundamental mis-alignment with international soft law and human rights standards.
- You’ll have seen the NGO complaint against the European Commission with the European Ombudsman, making the case that the Omnibus process was undemocratic, untransparent and rushed. The European Ombudsman investigates complaints about poor administration within EU institutions, bodies, offices, and agencies, and this could result in the opening of an investigation into the European Commission.
Ok I leave you now with a challenge.
Do you remember that hilarious scene in Monty Python, What Have the Romans Ever Done for Us?
And then how this has been used for other areas (e.g., What Has Aid Ever Done for Anyone, here)
Who wants to take on the following video: What Have Sustainability Laws Ever Done for Us?
Apart from building the resilience of companies; ensuring companies are here for the long-term; leveling the playing field and holding laggards accountable; ensuring safer and fairer working conditions and human rights respect; and helping to avoid a climate meltdown and catastrophic environmental failure. Apart from this, I ask you, What Have Sustainability Laws Ever Done for Us? 🤔
See you next week!
Anna ⭐
