This Thursday, the European Parliament, the EU Council and the European Commission reached a political agreement on the debate Nature Restoration Lawwhat are you looking for Recovering 20% of already damaged land and marine ecosystems It will enter the European Union by 2030, and all of this will happen by mid-century.
“We have reached an agreement to restore not only life, but also economic and social services, including food security, which affects people’s well-being and the viability of many of our activities,” the deputy said. Teresa Ribera, Minister of Ecological Transition of Spain.
Representing the Spanish presidency of the Council of the EU, Ribera traveled to Brussels to lead the latest negotiations between member states and the European Parliament, where Spanish MP César Luena (PSOE) is rapporteur.
“Seventy years after starting the European project, We will have a common nature restoration policy, This is very important because it not only solves the situation of degraded ecosystems, but also serves to fight against the effects of climate change,” Luena said after the agreement.
The Nature Restoration Act is part of the proposal launched by the European Commission in December 2022 to keep pace with the agreements reached on biodiversity at the United Nations COP15.
Complementing other EU legal instruments such as the Habitats and Birds Directives or the Natura 2000 Network, the new regulations aim to restore at least 20% of the EU’s degraded terrestrial and marine ecosystems by 2030 and all by 2050. binding goals
Urban green spaces cannot be reduced
The final agreement calls for prioritizing the restoration of sites in the Natura 2000 network by 2030one of many flexibilities introduced to create a difficult agreement.
In addition, countries will have specific requirements to correct the decline in pollinators and have a target of restoring 30% of peatland drained for agricultural use by 2030; protecting dead trees in forests to improve the biodiversity of forest ecosystems; do not reduce urban green spaces and remove artificial barriers to rivers.
In order to overcome the controversial financing obstacle, it was decided that the Commission would submit a report on the financial resources available at Community level, the needs and, if appropriate, make a proposal to increase the allocation in the EU budget.
And as a nod to farmers, the agreed upon text The measures included in the regulation are allowed to be postponed for up to one year “due to unexpected emergencies”. Some of these goals may not be possible to achieve within the planned time frame,” Ribera explained.
It was not expected to be a controversial file, it was the law of nature. Large agricultural enterprises were opposed from the beginning. The party represented by the Copa-Cogeca platform was politically poisoned with the approach of the European Parliament elections in mid-2024.
obstacle course
German Manfred Weber, leader of the European People’s Party, has weaponized future regulations against the green agenda At a time when agricultural parties or associations are gaining strength in the Netherlands, Poland or Austria, the Commission is approaching the propositions of the far right in its search for agricultural votes.
Popular ones claim the law threatens food security, forces farmers to give up part of their land to preserve biodiversity, and jeopardizes the deployment of renewable energy infrastructure, while the far right claims it is a product. “Climate fanaticism.”
On the opposite side, social democrats, greens, the majority of the left and liberals, as well as environmental NGOs, other agricultural platforms, the scientific community, hunters, renewable energy companies, a wide range of multinational companies and other organizations defended the text. Nearly one million citizens signed a petition in favor of the law.
European Commission President Ursula Von der Leyen stood in profile to avoid friendly fire The Christian Democrats, on the other hand, did everything possible to prevent the European Parliament from processing the text; They subjected the text to numerous agonizing votes in parliamentary committees and plenary session to reject debate and force the Executive to make a new proposal.
In the end, the EPP failed and the European Parliament managed to give itself negotiating powers by a narrow margin (336 in favour, 300 against and 13 abstentions) thanks to agreement between the socialists, liberals, greens and the left, and 21 of the left-wing parties. 178 EPP MPs who broke voting discipline.
All this created what European sources describe as an “unusual situation”; because member states came to the final negotiations with a more assertive attitude than the European Parliament, which usually takes the lead on environmental issues.
Political agreement reached in negotiations will still need to be approved by both Member States through the Council of the EU and through the plenary of the European Parliament.