Privacy Overview
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Cookies that are categorised as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience. Read our privacy policy here for more details.
Always Active

Necessary cookies are required to enable the basic features of this site, such as providing secure log-in or adjusting your consent preferences. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable data.

No cookies to display.

Functional cookies help perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collecting feedback, and other third-party features.

No cookies to display.

Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics such as the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.

No cookies to display.

Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.

No cookies to display.

Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with customized advertisements based on the pages you visited previously and to analyze the effectiveness of the ad campaigns.

No cookies to display.

Environment

Focus of Nature Restoration Law Debate Now Moves to Trilogues

Farm Inspections

Speaking from Strasbourg IFA President Tim Cullinan said that, as the vote to reject the law has not passed, the focus now moves to the trilogue process between the EU Commission, the Council and Parliament.

“The vote for outright rejection only lost by 12 votes (324 to 312), the reality is that the original EU Commission version of the law has in effect been pushed back. Arising from its rejection at three EU Parliament Committees, significant changes and amendments have been made, particularly in relation to rewetting and more changes are needed,” Tim Cullinan said.

“The EU Council recently agreed a much-modified version of the law. While we would have concerns around this version it would address some of the concerns but more changes are needed and we have been in Strasbourg this week campaigning on these in advance of today’s vote and the trilogues,” he said

“There is real and genuine concern that there will be significant ramifications from passing this law in this format. There is still a lot of ambiguity around what the law will mean and with no impact assessments undertaken at Member State level the impact on farm incomes, food production and farming practices is unclear,” he added.

“The debate became about whether people are for or against nature which is a misrepresentation of the situation. The detail of the proposed ‘law’ is the issue,” he said.

Related Articles