EPP MEPs are calling on the EU Commission to rewrite the planned EU nature restoration law: “A good intention but a bad execution”, commented EPP Group Vice-President Esther de Lange and negotiator- head of the EPP, Christine Schneider, on Wednesday told journalists in Brussels. The objective of the initiative is to improve biodiversity.
At the end of May, the European People’s Party withdrew from negotiations on the planned EU Nature Restoration Act. The EU Parliament’s Committee on Agriculture had already rejected the planned law. However, the primary responsibility lies with the environment commission, which is expected to vote on this in mid-June.
“It’s not that we don’t want to fulfill our obligations to the environment. Our farmers want to make a contribution and be innovative,” emphasized Dutch EU delegate de Lange. For them, however, the Commission’s legislative proposal represents a step backwards. According to his German colleague Schneider, “it does not contain a solid impact assessment for food and energy security and no answer on how to ensure food security. Bees and insects are not enough, we need our farmers.”
This text comes in a difficult global context, said Agriculture Committee rapporteur Anne Sander: “For months, the EU has been putting forward new proposals that are difficult for farmers. We are waiting for positive proposals.” To save the planet it is not necessary to produce less, it is necessary to produce better, said the French MEP. She called for investment in new technologies.
In addition to planned measures to reduce the use of pesticides in agriculture, the law is seen as an essential component of the green transition called for by the EU Commission in the Green Deal. Commission Vice-President Franz Timmermans, who is responsible for the Green Deal, strongly advocated continuing negotiations.
The EU Commission is asking lawmakers to sign “a blank check with no emergency brake”, criticized de Lange. According to Schneider, Timmermans forced the MPs to agree: “The committee’s job is to bring people together, not threaten them. We were ready to negotiate.” From their point of view, this is currently not possible.