Yesterday, Ministers of EU Member States formally approved the first in a series of “Omnibus” packages – legislative bundles designed to reopen and dilute foundational EU rules that will affect environmental protection, public-interest safeguards and the accountability of corporations. After intense corporate lobbying and a process dogged by sustained concerns about the EU’s failure to uphold basic procedural safeguards, states will sign off on what amounts to the most significant rollback of corporate accountability standards in recent decades.

This is deeply concerning in and of itself, but it is also indicative of a broader trajectory. Deregulation is asserting itself as a guiding force in EU policy and this shift is deliberate. It reflects the sustained influence of powerful corporate lobbying, led in large part by major extractive interests, and Ireland has thus far played a co-operative role in this steady erasure of hard-won rights and standards. 

Over two years ago the EU negotiated a series of modest yet important new laws to ensure that large multinational companies would be held accountable for human rights abuses and environmental harm in their operations around the world – from oil spills to labour exploitation throughout supply chains. These measures were not radical. They were intended to ensure that companies operating within the EU market respected basic human rights and environmental standards wherever they did business. 

Rolling back on rights protections

Last year, however, the European Commission announced a sweeping rollback. Under the banner of ‘competitiveness’, these standards were dismantled at breakneck speed through the first Omnibus. Ireland, which had championed the original framework, shifted position. Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael MEPs voted alongside far-right parties in the European Parliament to support the package, weakening the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive – legislation specifically designed to prevent and hold companies accountable for human rights abuses and environmental damage.

That vote passed with little public scrutiny. Its impact has been met with dismay by workers and communities who have and will continue to suffer the cost of irresponsible business practices. It should also be understood that the first Omnibus is a test case for how far governments are willing to go in dismantling key protections when faced with sustained corporate pressure.

This is only the beginning. A further series of Omnibus packages touching areas including industrial emissions, chemical safety and nature and biodiversity frameworks and beyond is set to follow. The first rollback has established the template.

Ireland in the chair

This trajectory takes on added significance in light of Ireland’s forthcoming Presidency of the Council of the European Union. The Presidency carries responsibility not merely for managing legislative files, but for stewarding the Union’s broader commitments and ambitions. Ireland will be in the chair for at least some of the forthcoming Omnibus negotiations. That role will test whether stated commitments to human rights, the environment and climate outweigh the protection of competitiveness and corporate interests. 

This matters because deregulation does not happen in a vacuum. Ireland’s Climate Minister has admitted that the State will miss its emissions reduction targets by roughly half. The cost of failure will not be borne by polluters, but by the public, with estimates suggesting penalties that could reach €28 billion coming from public money diverted away from housing, healthcare, and public services to pay for political inaction.

At the same time, civil society organisations and trade unions have raised serious concerns about being shut out. Doors are closing to those representing workers, communities, and environmental defenders, while corporate interests remain central and fundamental to the shaping of public policy. The result is a political ecosystem where public interest concerns struggle to compete with private lobbying power.

Rather than maintaining a principled approach rooted in international human rights and environmental law, the Government increasingly treats existing frameworks as obstacles to be managed or delayed. The language has shifted from leadership to “competitiveness,” from protection to “burden reduction.” The Government’s strategy increasingly appears to be one of avoidance, delaying implementation, weakening enforcement, and resisting binding obligations wherever possible. 

Trading public good for corporate gain

A similar pattern is evident in the Government’s decision to waive pre-legislative scrutiny of the Arbitration (Amendment) Bill. If introduced, this legislation would allow Ireland to ratify investment court system provisions under CETA and future trade agreements, granting foreign investors extraordinary powers to sue the Irish State for alleged losses to expected future profits. Such mechanisms risk deterring governments from acting in the public interest on housing, environmental protection or climate policy for fear of costly litigation.

This is not about rejecting trade or investment. It is about resisting a model in which corporate protections are strengthened while human and environmental safeguards are weakened. When investor interests are elevated above democratic accountability, the balance between private power and public authority begins to tilt.

The first Omnibus vote passed with limited public attention but its implications are long-term. It signals the direction of travel for 2026 and beyond. Will environmental and human rights standards continue to be quietly eroded in the name of competitiveness? Or will there be a course correction – one that re-centres communities, workers and the climate in economic decision-making?

Europe is at a crossroads, and Ireland has a choice to make. The coming years will reveal whether our leaders are willing to resist the idea that “might makes right,” or whether they will continue to trade long-term public wellbeing for short-term corporate gain.