The battle rages on and the outcome of the vote is uncertain. MEPs decide, Wednesday, July 12, the fate of a law aimed at restoring ecosystems, flagship text of the Green Pact of the European Union (EU) which the right is fiercely opposed and has become the emblem of a political battle one year before the European elections.
This legislation proposed in mid-2022 by Brussels would impose on Member States binding objectives for the restoration of land and marine areas, damaged by pollution or intensive exploitation, to preserve biodiversity, in line with the COP15 agreement. to Montreal. In the absence of agreement in the parliamentary committee, all the MEPs gathered in Strasbourg must vote at midday on a motion of rejection, vigorously defended by the European People’s Party (EPP, right), the first force in the hemicycle.
As with other texts of the Green Deal, the Conservatives say they are worried about the impact for agriculture, fishing or renewable energies. “Restoring nature should not sign the death warrant of all economic, industrial, forestry and agricultural production in Europe”, hammered the French elected Anne Sander (EPP), rapporteur of the text in the Agriculture Committee.
In particular, it criticizes the objective of “high diversity topographic features” (hedges, ditches, wetlands, etc.) on 10% of agricultural land by 2030.
Brussels “believes that purely and simply freezing 10% of our agricultural land does not represent a danger to our food security,” she criticizes. We may reduce our emissions, but we will have to import our food from all over the world, where production standards are far removed from ours. »
Arguments taken up by the powerful agricultural organization Copa-Cogeca, which expressed its opposition on Tuesday before Parliament in the name of a productivist approach.
In a concurrent demonstration, a hundred climate activists led by Greta Thunberg on the contrary defended the project. “To mitigate climate crisis and biodiversity loss, we need to restore nature more. Science has proven it,” said the young Swedish activist, hoping for the “widest possible” vote in favor of the text.
“A real problem”
As the June 2024 European election approaches, the EPP’s strategy is accused of being “electoralist” by supporters of the text, who denounce “untruths” and are alarmed at a rapprochement with the far right ( ID) and Eurosceptics (ECR). “Historically, the right had nature conservation in its philosophy. Today, she prefers to align herself with the far right and the lobbies, it’s a break,” lamented environmentalist Yannick Jadot.
“The famous” 10% of agricultural land frozen “, that simply never existed”, abounds Pascal Canfin (Renew, centrists), president of the environment commission. This is an EU-wide indicative target that can be achieved by planting fruit trees or through crop rotations, he recalled. Not to mention that this could increase agricultural yields (less soil erosion, increased pollination, return of birds attacking parasites, etc.). “We are very angry at the impossibility of having a rational debate. Usually, this kind of argument is made by the far right, never the EPP. We have a real problem, ”says this former French minister.
Yet, with more than 80% of Europe’s natural habitats already degraded, “this is the bare minimum, not even up to the challenge of being on the Paris climate agreement nails” insists Manon Aubry (GUE / NGL, left).
If the left is very favorable to the text, the centrists of Renew remain divided, with a third of reluctant elected officials, which augurs for a vote being played by a few votes on the motion of rejection. If the latter is adopted, the President of Parliament, Roberta Metsola, will ask Brussels to withdraw her text. The European Commission has already warned that it will not submit an alternative proposal.
The member states, which already adopted their position in June, could decide to confirm their approach, but without the support of Parliament. “It would be game over” for the political future of the project, according to Mr. Canfin.
If the rejection motion is not adopted, the MEPs will examine a compromise corresponding exactly to the common position of the States, which has moreover been supported by a majority of governments belonging to the EPP. Then they will vote on some 136 amendments to determine Parliament’s position for negotiations with the states. “Ambition could be very deeply weakened, but it will be better than nothing,” said Pascal Canfin.
