Additional Comment re Question 5

 The categorisation set out in the list of activities to be considered as “socially harmful” is
very much a yes/no – black and white approach;

 In fact one should distinguish between those activities that will be usually, or in most cases,
harmful as they result in the production or distribution of a product/services that could be
determined as harmful by nature (e.g. growing of tobacco or the manufacture of
controversial weapons) and those that could be harmful depending on how the products
are being produced/manufactured/distributed or the services rendered (for instance,
footwear or clothing are basic necessities products that are not socially harmful when
produced/manufactured/distributed in a sustainable way);

 The list seems to be drawn out of most commonly used sectorial exclusion lists, rather than
taking a comprehensive approach. As a result, the list seems to be rather incomplete and
there is no option to add something in an “other” box;

 Moreover, the consultation timeline does not give the chance to the industry to go through
an in-depth analysis on each of the above activities one by one and identify the potentially
missing ones.