Schellhorn rages:

“Leftists don’t give a sh…t about tomorrow’s unemployed”

NEOS State Secretary Sepp Schellhorn is appalled by the vote in the EU Parliament.(Bild: EPA/OLIVIER HOSLET)

The supply chain law passed by the EU, or rather the amendment that has now failed, is causing political and economic emotions to boil over. Critics see a veritable roller coaster of bureaucracy coming at companies. Supporters argue that it will strengthen human rights and environmental protection. NEOS State Secretary Sepp Schellhorn got carried away with an extremely emotional statement. 

The Supply Chain Act, which obliges companies in EU countries to demand human rights and environmental protection from suppliers, was actually supposed to have been weakened on Wednesday with an amendment. However, the compromise failed, with a narrow majority of MEPs voting not to enter into final negotiations with the member states.

This means that Parliament will have to vote again on the content of the law in November. It could advocate stricter or significantly weaker rules in the decisive negotiations with the EU member states. 

How much bureaucracy for human rights?
However, the version of the law adopted by the EU Parliament's Legal Affairs Committee on Monday would continue to cause high bureaucratic costs and at the same time leave most violations and risks undetected, criticize the Austrian Wifo and the Supply Chain Intelligence Institute Austria (ASCII).

Child labor in a cobalt mine in the Congo, documented by Amnesty International.(Bild: Amnesty)

This is because the most serious violations do not take place at the direct suppliers but further down the supply chain. Cobalt production in the Congo was cited as an example. Cobalt is often extracted there using child labor and under life-threatening working conditions, but it is a multi-stage process from these companies to the large European buyers. This means that cobalt extraction falls outside of the new testing framework.

Schellhorn: "The left doesn't care about the unemployed of tomorrow"
Sepp Schellhorn (NEOS), State Secretary for European and International Affairs, made an almost radical statement during the debate: "It's about the competitiveness of companies. The left don't seem to give a damn about the unemployed of tomorrow," raged Schellhorn, referring to the result of the vote in the EU Parliament: "Those who voted against cutting red tape are doing massive damage to the location. They haven't heard the bang, they still haven't understood."

The ÖVP was also disappointed, especially as an agreement had already been negotiated with the SPÖ and the Greens in the Legal Affairs Committee. Reinhold Lopatka, head of the ÖVP delegation in the European Parliament, said on Wednesday afternoon: "The provisional rejection of the removal of red tape in the Supply Chain Act is a wasted opportunity for our economy and the future of our companies." MEP Lukas Mandl regrets that "today's negative vote has put a considerable obstacle in the way of deregulation". The right and left fringes had ultimately brought down the project, with support from the political center.

SPÖ and Greens satisfied with rejection
The SPÖ and Greens, on the other hand, were satisfied, but still see room for improvement. SPÖ MP Evelyn Regner emphasized: "Today we have prevented the fate of the Supply Chain Act from being sealed as an empty shell. We have ensured that a position without any real demands is not simply waved through. A position that was not only unambitious because of the European People's Party, but completely devoid of content."

Green MEP Lena Schilling was equally satisfied: "Today in Strasbourg it has become clear that there is still a majority that cares about human rights and environmental protection. We will continue to fight against child labor, exploitation and environmental destruction in the upcoming negotiations."

The aim of the EU directive is to protect human rights
The European Supply Chain Act was actually passed last year. The aim is to strengthen human rights worldwide. Large companies are to be held accountable if they profit from human rights violations such as child or forced labor. Following criticism from companies, parts of the directive are to be simplified even before they are applied.