Nature restoration, blitz of greens and socialists to tell us what to grow
“Let’s protect Mother Nature”. This could be the slogan with which European Socialists and Greens are making propaganda in favor of the umpteenth provision of the now famous Green new deal, the package of environmental measures which aims to “clean up” the continent without any concern for its social and economic impact. While, it goes without sayingwhoever opposes or tries to suggest distinctions is branded as a “vulgar denier”.
This time we are not talking about cars, food or packaging in the strict sense, but about nature in the broad sense. The Nature restorationthis is the name of the legislation that would oblige governments to restore natural zones to at least 20% of the land and sea surface by 2030 and to extend them to all habitats that need recovery by 2050, had suffered a sudden stop a few weeks ago in the Agriculture Commission of the European Parliament.
In both the first and second sessions, the center-right ECR group (European Conservatives and Reformists) and the EPP (led by the German Manfred Weber) had voted solidly against the socialists, also being able to count on the support of Renew Europe, by Emmanuel Macron.
A very interesting alliance game
An agreement that could also have strategic developments in perspective. The embarkation has eliminated some of the distortions of the law, but the system has remained solid. The obsession of Socialists and Greens the only thing left is to bring home the largest number of green measures by the end of the legislature (votes will take place in June 2024), also because priorities could change from next year. In short, there is little surprise if they have pushed for an extraordinary convocation of the Environment commission. At 8 and 30 in the morning of June 15during the Strasbourg plenary, there will be a vote on Nature restoration.
“For the first time in this legislature on this dossier, we have seen the majority formed by the European People’s Party and the Socialists split. We hope to be able to repeat in the Environment Committee what happened in the Agriculture Committee” he explains Sergio Berlatothe Fdi MEP who is a member of the environment commission.
“Many MEPs, despite belonging to different political families, have understood that an overly idealistic approach to environmental issues risks doing a lot of damage. They cannot impose choices on us which, although imagined with the aim of protecting the environment, result harmful to the health of our citizens” goes on. Certainly the death of Silvio Berlusconi which will lead many Italian MEPs to leave Strasbourg complicates the plans of front of no.
The problem is in the ideological approach
The request to postpone the vote was rejected by Pascal Canfin, the “extremist” (in an environmentalist sense of course) president of the Envi commission. Of course, if the approach remains ideological, very little will change. But if you look at the contents it is difficult not to notice the paradoxes of the legislation. “To demand that river courses have 25,000 kilometers of free flow by 2030”, he underlines Pietro Fiocchi, the other member of the Fdi Environment Commission, “thus removing all obstacles, including dams is paradoxical, if the goal is to encourage alternative energy production, as well as impractical”. “The provision,” he continues. “It will affect almost 50% of the Italian territory with a whole series of problems for the agricultural world which in some cases will be forced to give up certain productions” he adds.
The classic example is that of a vast land cultivated with maize
Due to the new regulations, at least 10% of that area will have to be reserved for the cultivation of another product. The dear biodiversity is saved, but the farmer loses out. Also because the system is based on a bizarre satellite mapping system of the land that will certainly bring other critical issues. However, the situation in Brussels and Strasbourg is fluid. It must be remembered that after the passage in the Environment commission, the ball will pass to Parliament (the goal of the Socialists and Greens is to bring the provision to the Strasbourg Plenary in July) and then into the hands of the Trilogue (Commission, Parliament and EU Council). In short, water must pass under the bridge.
In all of this, however, the attitude of Ursula von der Leyen should be noted. The president of the EU Commission, who according to the Belgian press would have sent a working note to the 27 member states announcing some steps backwards on the regulation that go in the direction of the will of the French president, Emmanuel Macron and the Belgian premier, Alexander DeCroo. No obligation of results, flexibility in the objectives to make cities greener, simple invitation to increase by 10% (or even less) the agricultural land with characteristics of high level of biodiversity. It’s not that the president has changed his mind. The point is that in less than a year there will be a vote and a reconfirmation is well worth a few small renunciations on the ambitions of the Green deal.