The European agricultural umbrella organizations Copa and Cogeca believe that the Environment Committee of the European Parliament does not sufficiently take into account European agriculture and food production.
Last week, the ENVI committee in Brussels decided that in the EU Climate Policy, the reduction of air and soil pollution must be much further reduced over the next ten years: not by about 50 to 55 percent, but 60 percent. It is expected that EU Commissioner Frans Timmermans will officially announce this this week.
After last week's vote in the Environment Committee on the environmental climate law, Copa and Cogeca stressed in a joint statement the importance of greenhouse gas reduction in such a way that it does not threaten food production.
The umbrella organizations of farmers and forest owners believe that, even if the ENVI committee introduced some improvements, the Climate Policy still does not sufficiently address the role of agriculture and the possible consequences this could have in European rural areas.
Moreover, Copa-Cogeca point to the disagreements between political groups in the Environment Committee, which probably also apply in the full European Parliament. In recent months, it has become clear in the European political arena that most decisions about the Green Deal, Climate Policy, biodiversity, and food safety are now prepared by the Environment Committee, and that the AGRI agriculture committee is no longer leading in this.
The strategic importance of food production and food security must, according to the agricultural umbrella organizations, be highlighted more specifically, especially if climate adaptation and greenhouse gas reduction could become a threat. The European agri-cooperatives would like to see their key role better recognized.
In this context, Pekka Pesonen, the secretary-general of Copa and Cogeca, emphasized: “Since 1990, the agricultural sector has achieved one of the most significant reductions in net greenhouse gas emissions with a decrease of 20 percent. The efforts of the European agricultural community to adapt to constantly changing climate conditions while ensuring food security and ecosystem services require sustainable funding, alongside continuous innovation of production methods.”
With this last reference, he pointed to the still existing criticism regarding the size of the CAP agricultural budget for the coming years. Next week in Brussels, it must become clear whether the European Parliament agrees with the multiannual budget as established in the EU summit in July between the heads of government and the European Commission. The European Parliament believes there have been too many cuts in this budget and wants an additional 110 billion euros for future-oriented innovation.
Furthermore, the European Parliament is completely dissatisfied that the heads of state have still not fixed that the European Union may impose its own taxes for raising new revenues. To be able to repay the hundreds of billions from the economic corona recovery fund in the future, extra money must come to the table one way or another.
The European Parliament would like to see the EU able to develop its own revenues in the future, instead of being entirely dependent on the 'financial willingness' of the EU countries.