This week, a very well attended high-calibre event on the subject of conflict minerals, jointly organised by AK, ÖGB and IG Metall took place in Brussels. The recently started so-called “trilogue negotiations” between the European Parliament, the Council and the European Commission formed the background for this event.

According to studies carried out, in Africa, which possesses about 30% of mineral reserves worldwide and where the overall GDP contribution of the mining industry is about 24%, 27 conflicts are in direct relation to the purchase of raw materials, in particular in the Democratic Republic of Congo. The first international efforts to reduce the trade with conflict minerals began in 2010. The OECD adopted its “Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Supply Chains of Minerals”, and the Security Council of the United Nations adopted a relevant resolution, which was implemented in the US with Section 1502 of the Dodd-Franck Act. The Dodd-Franck Act provides binding due-diligence rules for companies registered in the US.

At European level, the Commission presented a Draft Regulation for a Union-wide system in 2014, which, however, is based on self-certification of importers of tin, tantalum, tungsten and gold from high-risk regions. Hence, the Commission Proposal is significantly deviating from the US approach. Companies shall participate on a voluntary basis; only upstream producers (furnaces and refineries) and importers are affected; on the other hand, all conflict regions (not only the Great Lakes Region) are covered. All importers, who are voluntarily prepared to apply the due-diligence rules, are able to declare themselves as self-certified responsible importers towards competent authorities in the Member States. Whilst dealing with the Commission Proposal in the Trade Commission of the European Parliament in February 2015, the European Parliament tightened the Commission Proposal. It demanded binding due-diligence for furnaces and refineries, in conjunction with voluntary measures for importers and an introduction of a quality mark for downstream producers. This position, based on which the European Parliament has significantly changed the Commission Proposal, was adopted in May 2015 with 402 votes in favour and 118 votes against. At the same time, it was agreed to enter into negotiations with the Council.

These negotiations were started recently. It was the objective of the event to draw attention to fundamental trade union demands concerning this issue and to get behind Parliament in respect of the Member States.

To begin with, Professor Raimund Bleischwitz of the University College in London gave an overview of the main results of his study on conflict minerals.

Afterwards, Signe Ratso, Director in the European Commission's Directorate-General for Trade, presented an overview of the current state of affairs and of the role of the Commission with regard to the negotiations between European Parliament and Member States. She pointed out that the Proposal on conflict minerals would also have to be seen in connection with the wider concept of the “Trade for All” strategy of the Commission, which was also concerned with global value-added chains and the Corporate Social Responsibility strategy of the Commission. The originally presented Commission Proposal was actually based on voluntariness and would have in particular the furnaces in its sight as a strategic link.

Bernd Lange (S&D), chair of the European Parliament International Trade Committee pointed out that the objective was to focus on global trade chains. He voiced doubts regarding the concept of voluntariness; after all, many businesses had failed to accept and implement the voluntary OECD rules. That is why the European Parliament had come out in favour of binding rules for the upstream market. There had been initial negotiations with the Member States; however, the government representatives had not shown any willingness to negotiate during these negotiations.

Glen Mpufane, South African trade unionist and Director of Mining for IndustriALL Global Union, pointed out that workers would be the main connecting factor in the production chain. Fair trade and decent work were possible. The regulation of conflict minerals would deal with the question whether the “carrot and stick policy” was the right approach. With regard to defining decent work, he referred to the ILO definition. In addition, mining work in conflict regions was in many cases characterised by people working as day labourers; their jobs had to be changed into regular employment.

Finally, Monique Lempers, Value Chain Director at Fairphone, a Dutch producer of mobile phones, which claims to obtain its raw materials only from certified producers without the involvement of forced or child labour voiced her opinion that both voluntary and binding systems would be good, provided they would result in actual changes.

Further Information:

 

Press Release of the European Parliament

Präsentation von Prof. Raimund Bleischwitz

Pictures of the event