The European Parliament (EP) has passed a position on European Commission’s proposed divisive Nature Restoration Act by a narrow margin of votes. This act provides for numerous nature restoration activities to be implemented by the year 2030. These restoration activities cover at least 20% of EU’s land and marine territories.
Before the vote in the EU and Latvia nature activists passionately invited MEPs to adopt the draft regulation unchanged [this did not happen]. Other groups – particularly farmers and organisations of so-called industrial large-scale manufacturers requested MEPs to reject the act.
The invitation to reject the regulation was answered by three Latvian MEPs – Sandra Kalniete, Dace Melbārde and Roberts Zīle.
Other Latvian MEPs – Andris Ameriks, Nils Ušakovs, Ivars Ijabs, Inese Vaidere, Tatyana Zhdanok – all supported the regulation. The project itself was softened a lot during the votes in the European Parliament.
On Wednesday, the 12th of July, 336 MEPs voted in favour of the EP’s position, 300 voted against and 13 refrained. This means the European Parliament is prepared to commence talks with the Council of Europe on the final redaction of this legislative act.
***
With this position the European Parliament admits that more than 80% of European biotopes are in poor state. In June 2022 the European Commission initiated the Nature Restoration Regulation in order to contribute to the restoration of degraded nature across the EU’s land and sea area and to achieve the EU’s climate and biodiversity targets in a long-term perspective. According to the European Commission, this new legislative act would bring significant economic benefits, because
“every euro spent on nature restoration will bring us at least eight euros in return”.
EP public spokespersons mentioned in the released statement that by developing this position, MEPs have taken into account residents’ expectations for the protection and restoration of biodiversity, the landscape and the oceans. It is stressed that restoration of ecosystems is important for the fight against climate change and reduction of bio-diversity and reducing threats to food security and availability. Before then MEPs voted against the proposal to reject the European Commission’s proposal (312 votes in favour, 324 against, and 12 abstained).
At the same time, the press-release mentions that
the legislative draft does not provide for the creation of new protected territories
and the objectives listed therein can be postponed if unexpected consequences for the economy or society appear as a result. The European Parliament stresses the regulation cannot be allowed to block the creation of new renewable energy resource infrastructure. To do this, it is necessary to add a new section that would explain that installation of such infrastructure is in the interest of the public.
The parliament notes that the law would be allowed to be invoked only once the European Commission has provided information on the conditions that would guarantee long-term food supplies in the EU, and once EU member states have calculated the size of territories that require restoration and meet the restoration objectives for each individual biotope.
After the vote, the rapporteur César Luena from the Social Democrats Group told the media:
The Nature Restoration Act is an important part of Europe’s Green Course, and it complies with scientific consensus and recommendations on the restoration of European ecosystems.
Farmers and fishermen will benefit from it.
On top of that, the EU will leave land suitable for living for future generations.
In 12 months after this regulation comes into force, the EC will have to analyse the gap between the required funding and EU’s available funding, and look for solutions to close this gap using special EU instruments.
***
Latvian Association of Ornithologists (LOB) has already expressed the collective disappointment from environmental activists that the regulation was “weakened”. Environmentalists claim the parliament’s decision was made “despite an unprecedented – and frequently blatantly absurd – disinformation campaign aimed at rejecting the law altogether, led by conservative and right-wing politicians and agricultural and fisheries lobbies”.
The vote, according to LOB, took place after powerful mobilisation of society to defend the law and the integrity of EU’s Green Course and to put a stop to the spread of fake news. More than a million citizens supported the Nature Restoration Law with their signatures, more than 6 000 scientists, more than 100 companies and representatives of civil society in many sectors.
According to LOB, to achieve a compromise, MEPs rejected many important commitments and objectives, which has resulted in a weaker position than what was initially proposed by the European Commission. It is especially stressed that the European Parliament’s position has excluded the proposal on restoration of agricultural land and peatland.
BirdLife Europe nature restoration policy specialist Sofie Ruysschaert mentions: “The result of the vote is a modest victory of hope over fear and a victory of truth over lies. While there is reason to celebrate, it is nevertheless disastrous that peatlands, farmland and important restoration measures are being abandoned so that the law can pass the vote. We need the three institutions of the European Union to quickly agree on a final, substantially improved text, so that real work can begin. The climate and biodiversity will not wait.”
LOB board chairman Viesturs Ķerus explains the local situation: “In Latvia both grassland and forests, as well as other biomes, are in poor state, but the Nature Restoration Law could become a significant turn for the preservation of natural diversity. The efforts of environmental organisations, scientists and the public have succeeded in ensuring that MEPs do not give in to campaigns of lies and that the law has not been rejected in its entirety. However, it will depend only on further negotiations whether it really becomes a valuable tool for improving the state of nature and human well-being or remains as an empty shell.”
***
LOB together with Latvia’s Nature Fund, Green Freedom Association and the World Nature Fund invited MEPs to support the Nature Restoration Regulation and not support amendments that significantly changed the European Commission’s developed proposal.
According to environment organisations, the Nature Restoration Regulation can promote sustainable development of agricultural systems, as well as the restoration of floodplains, swamps and other wetlands, reducing the risks of both flooding and extreme drought, which is becoming more and more relevant in Latvia as well.
***
In an open letter signed by 17 Latvian agricultural NGOs, MEPs are invited to not support the Nature Restoration Regulation. They believe the requirements included in proposals from the European Commission would negatively impact Latvia’s agricultural sector.
“We call on MEPs not to support the proposals for a regulation on nature restoration going forward before an adequate, in-depth assessment of the economic, social and financial impact of the proposals on the agricultural, forestry and fisheries sectors in the Member States, as well as the impact on food security,” said LOSP chairman Guntis Gūtmanis.
The Nature Restoration Regulation will be viewed in the “trialogue format” – trilateral talks involving the European Parliament, Council of Europe and the European Commission.
Also read: BNN ANALYSES | Lithuania’s biggest takeaways from Vilnius NATO summit – not only new security guarantees