Speeches

Mr President, Minister, Commissioner, thank you for your words, which are far removed from the statements made in recent days by Mr Weber, leader of the EPP, which are pure populism one year before the European elections. It is not the farmers he is listening to, but the representatives of the multinational agrochemical and agro-industry companies who are making huge profits in this crisis to the detriment of farmers and consumers. Its camp is not that of farmers, it is that of finance and dividends. As you know, the challenge is not to produce more. The challenge is to allow access to food, and alternatives exist to both feed people, preserve biodiversity, and ensure a real income for farmers. European science asserts this today and has even modelled a plant-free agriculture by 2050 by returning to the path of agronomy and market regulation. But it is true that these alternatives make multinationals less profitable. As the number of farmers continues to decrease, and as the Green Deal you denounce requires an increase in the number of farmers to win the climate and biodiversity challenge, the EPP has become a spokesperson for the world of money at the expense of the future of our children, a gravedigger of European agriculture. In fact, you want everything to change so that nothing changes. This is your project. Please get out of these postures: agriculture, food, human health and biodiversity are much better.

Mr President, Commissioner, 2022 once again agreed with the IPCC: We're regressing. It is high time to assess the urgent need to act, and to act concretely, without procrastination, without hesitation. It is high time to assess the immense danger to the loss of our biodiversity posed by the climate issue. It is high time to understand that the droughts we are experiencing are not conjunctural. It is high time to realise that the forest fires that we have suffered, in France and elsewhere on our continent – and that this year we are suffering as early as April – are not straw fires. It is high time to measure the danger posed by the alteration of our water cycle, the threats to food production that are growing every day, as well as the risks to human health. I want to repeat it here: We must act, and act quickly. All our public policies must be reoriented in the light of this very real threat, and all must be involved in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. It is up to us politicians, through our responsible choices, to reverse this suicidal trend. And some in this assembly must stop shirking their responsibilities. The Green Deal is not an objective like any other. It must be our lighthouse in the storm, our horizon, our top priority. It is a question of our survival at all.

Madam President, Commissioner, the war in Ukraine, but also the health crisis, will have reminded us of a reality: security of food supply is not achieved. The resolution we are going to vote on today contains important ideas for building our strategic food autonomy. Yes, anti-dumping taxes on imports must be retained. Yes, the carbon border tax on fertilisers needs to be implemented as soon as possible if fertiliser production capacity is to be maintained. It is also crucial to use the joint purchasing mechanism on fertilisers to build strategic alliances with reliable international partners. But taking advantage of the current situation to obtain derogations from the Water Framework Directive is not acceptable. The objective must not be mistaken. I want to remind you here: there is no problem of food availability, neither in Europe nor in the world. We are facing a problem of access to food for consumers facing unprecedented price increases. So producing more with more fertilisers and more pesticides is not the solution: On the contrary, the solution lies in the regulation of agricultural markets, food aid for the most deprived and public food storage, which has been and will remain the most effective weapon against the various forms of speculation.

Mr President, Mr Timmermans, when the wise man shows the stars, the idiot looks at the finger. Green Deal, Farm to Fork Strategy, Biodiversity Strategy: so many projects hated even today by some ultraconservatives, neoliberals or climatosceptics – in our century! – and feared by others, but which nevertheless remain priority and urgent European projects. Missions that, in light of the degradation of our environment and biodiversity, are vital for the future of our European citizens. In this context, setting a 100% target for zero-emission vehicles in 2035 is a historic, ambitious and, in my opinion, a real decision, taken in the public interest. Of course, we will have to go beyond the electric, but we are talking about 2035 and I would like to say here that I think we should indeed take the opportunity to rethink the place of the automobile and, more broadly, the issue of mobility. But today is a first step for 2035 and this vote is essential for the future of our European citizens.

Mr President, Commissioner, the COP for Climate Change in Africa is an opportunity to recall a finding that is as cruel as it is unfair: Africa is the lowest emitter of greenhouse gases in the world, yet it is one of the biggest victims of climate change, be it droughts, floods, fires or the degradation of agricultural land. All the warning signs are on and I am not quoting the increase in cyclones or the retreat of Arctic sea ice. So yes, governments need to double down to reach their 2030 climate targets. And here in the European Parliament, we have a huge responsibility and we can no longer say things and do the opposite. The right and the liberals, who voted with us in 2019 for a state of climate emergency and who are doing everything today to empty the environmental texts of the ‘Fit for 55’ package, with the war in Ukraine or COVID as an alibi, must change their attitude. Ladies and gentlemen, you are mistaken and putting us all in grave danger. Solving the major problem of global warming is a matter of life and death and requires going beyond small political strategies to finally fight in the interest of all, and in particular of the African continent, which is hosting this COP27 in November.

Mr President, Commissioner, it will not have escaped anyone that Russia, by attacking Ukraine, has profoundly disrupted the supply of fertilisers to Europe and caused their prices to explode. Our objective must be clear: we need to secure the quantities of fertilisers available, so that our farmers can survive this price increase, but also to secure the food supply within Europe. Seven months ago, Commissioner, we asked you about this: in the resolution we voted on last March, which was specifically about food safety, we in the European Parliament sounded the alarm when we explained that our dependence on fertiliser exports – especially if they come from only a handful of producers – was excessive and could put us in a delicate, if not dangerous, position. On this occasion, we asked you to explore the possibility of lifting anti-dumping duties on fertilisers produced in third countries and to support a transition to organic fertilisers and related research and innovation in the EU. But nothing has been done. In seven months, the situation has worsened further, with inflation rising and food insecurity prevailing. I would like to reiterate here once again that I believe it is urgent that you implement the concept of strategic autonomy for agriculture and food. It is time, it is high time to implement food and environmental planning based on a systemic vision. It has now become an imperative. It is obvious that you have in front of you Members who are impatient and very interested in your announcement of a European fertiliser strategy. However, we must avoid confusing speed and haste, not destabilizing our businesses, nor increasing our dependence. If a lifting of the anti-dumping duties is decided, it must be temporary and have as counterpart financial aid, abounded by the contribution on superprofits. This is an important issue. Gas supply must be a priority for the sector. What we once asked for is still sadly relevant today.

Mr President, Commissioner, Minister, the decision taken by the Council to postpone the signing of the agreement is really difficult to accept and I can only regret that my country, France, was unable to reach signature during its presidency. I wish the new Presidency much courage and self-sacrifice in doing so. At a time when the world is going through a meta-crisis and when health, food, environmental or geopolitical crises are clashing, with all that this implies on the weakening of many populations, it is time to give all these countries and all these populations the means of food autonomy. Consideration should also be given to the suspension of debt service or the common framework for debt restructuring in poor countries. As regards the environment, the post-Cotonou agreement must be part of the fight against global warming so that their territories do not become uninhabitable. We need to rethink relations with developing countries in depth and we need to revisit our partnership models and be more attentive and supportive.

Mr President, Commissioner, no further progress has been made; since 2020, the world has made almost no progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals that the international community has set for 2030. No, the climate and environmental challenge is not solved, and we are far from it. The SDG index, which measures countries’ trajectory towards the 17 Sustainable Development Goals, is declining for the second year in a row. We could say to ourselves that it is the health crisis and then the war in Ukraine that are responsible, but this is not the case. Since 2016, the number of people suffering from hunger has increased. And Goal 2 to end world hunger by 2030 is fast moving away. The truth is that we are in fact at the heart of a meta-crisis of the capitalist system: health, economic, social, environmental, geopolitical and, tomorrow, financial crises. And our current policies are in permanent conflict with our planetary and human boundaries. That’s what needs to change. We know the solutions. Every week, new expert reports are added to the old ones. What we lack is the political will to turn the page on neoliberalism. Here in the European Parliament, we clearly have a role to play. Both the Green Deal and European strategic autonomy are major opportunities to reconnect with the welfare state and re-establish effective policies. The European Union has a responsibility to put its project on the trajectory of the 17 SDGs and we must do everything possible to bring the rest of the planet in that direction. We need to drive and support change.

Madam President, Commissioner, as we all know, the development of organic farming is a major challenge for the future of European agriculture. This is the way to truly reduce the use of pesticides and address human health challenges. It is also the way to contribute to the social and economic vitality of rurality and to progress on animal welfare. The report we will vote on tomorrow is fully balanced and supports the ambition of the Commission and I would like to thank the rapporteur, Simone Schmiedtbauer. But while this report voted in committee supports the objective of increasing areas in organic farming by 2030, it does not point to the figure of 25% mentioned by the Commission and it seemed important to us to produce an amendment, if only to assess the benefit of public policies in the future. I would also like to strongly recall that reducing half the use of pesticides by 2030 is not a leap into the void, alternatives such as biocontrol are developing and the most advanced research centres on the subject consider that the end of synthetic pesticides is achievable by 2050, provided that we give ourselves the means and firmly maintain the course, which is the case in this report.

Madam President, Commissioner, the text that I have the honour to present to you on the revision of the common organisation of the markets, the so-called ‘CMO’, i.e. on the economic aspect of the CAP, contains real progress, both for the sector and for farmers and for consumers. For the first time in more than 30 years, the reform of the CAP has resulted in more market regulation than deregulation. We felt it was essential for farmers to be able to obtain a fairer and more stable income in order to support them in the green transition. We have succeeded in renovating European crisis management tools. Agricultural market observatories will be set up within the European Commission, on all productions that require it, in order to increase transparency on the prices and margins of the various players and to monitor the level of food stocks as closely as possible so as to activate safeguard measures. We have obtained to extend vine planting authorisations up to 2045, and we know how essential this is for a sector that needs stability to move towards more sustainability. The energy value of wines will now have to be specified on labels and bottles, and the list of ingredients will be made more widely known to consumers. The de-alcoholisation of wines will finally be recognised. It will now be possible, for all products under protected geographical indication, to regulate the quantities placed on the market in such a way as to avoid crises and to have a fair distribution of value within the sectors. The following are some of the measures contained in this report. Together with all the shadow rapporteurs, whom I would like to thank here, we wanted a reform of the CMO that turns its back on 30 years of deregulation. A reform that restores farmers' dignity. A reform of the CMO that contributes to the reconstruction of European food sovereignty. Yes, the report before you is a step in the right direction, and it deserves to be widely voted on. But the problem with this reform does not lie in the CMO report. The problem with this reform, ladies and gentlemen, lies in the report on the strategic plan. The CAP we are going to vote on today is in strict continuity with the previous ones. The bulk of the budget will continue to be spent in the form of aid per hectare, which is paid without taking into account production methods and without taking into account agricultural prices and incomes. It is economic nonsense, it is budgetary nonsense, it is environmental nonsense and it is social nonsense. Look at what is happening today with the 50% increase in cereal prices over the last six months and, therefore, with the increase in bread across Europe. With this new CAP, we will continue to pay subsidies to farmers whose incomes will explode. At the same time, we will continue to do greenwashing with eco-schemes, which therefore appear to be a gadget measure par excellence. So yes, we have obtained social conditionality and from now on, farmers who do not respect labour law vis-à-vis their employees will lose part of their subsidies. This is a very important social step forward and I would like to pay tribute here to the competence and self-sacrifice of our colleague Maria Noichl, who fought, oh how many!, to achieve this result. However, this progress is not sufficient in view of a ceiling on aid which will remain optional and a redistributive payment which will be paid identically to all farmers, small family farms and giant farms alike. Moreover, while multilateralism is in deep crisis, we have a duty to relaunch it. But instead, we continue to defend WTO rules that prohibit public storage policies, while at the same time China and India do not care, continue to build strategic stocks and speculate. We're not serious. Instead, we should work together to reform agricultural rules that are totally unsuited to the challenges of the 21st century. Finally, the proposed project entails a de facto renationalisation of one of the main Community policies. This is historical nonsense. On the contrary, we should truly stand together to confront the major challenges before us in an international environment that is more unstable than ever. Everything is based on the content of the strategic plans of each Member State and the validation of these strategic plans by the Commission. However, when we are going to vote on the reform of the CAP today, which accounts for more than a third of the EU budget, we still do not know the content of these strategic plans. They must be submitted to the Commission by 31 December 2021. We do not know whether they will be aligned with the Green Deal or whether they will be in line with the Farm to Fork Strategy that we voted last month. And to tell the truth, the first versions we see circulating show that we are far from the point of view. Ladies and gentlemen, we are experiencing a real denial of democracy vis-à-vis the European Parliament, because once the text is voted on, we will no longer have any concrete means of influencing the negotiations between the Commission and the Member States. In fact, we are asked to vote today on a blank cheque. And I cannot resolve it. It is up to us to respond to the challenges of climate, security and food sovereignty. It is up to us to reconnect agriculture, food, health, biodiversity, climate and territories to provide solutions to these challenges. We owe it to our citizens, we owe it to the 11 million European farmers who feed us.

Mr President, Commissioner, Minister, five years after the Paris Agreement, the low level of commitment by nations around the world to climate neutrality is alarming. And if we do not act, or so little, the planet will experience an increase in global temperature of 3.2 degrees by 2100, more than double the COP21 target. The natural disasters that dot European news have once again reminded us of the urgency to act. We must therefore respect the Paris Agreement, but we will have to go even further. COP26 will be the barometer of global climate action and it will be essential to reaffirm or even revise the objective of limiting the temperature increase by 1.5 degrees. Otherwise, the victims will be counted in the millions. Europe must be a major player in urging states to increase their national contributions, legislate for the climate, support citizens in this transition while putting in place ambitious strategies across all sectors of the economy. Really questioning ourselves or permanently scuppering our future? Here is the choice before us.

Madam President, Commissioner, the Farm to Fork Strategy is at the heart of the European Green Deal and I will vote in favour of it, because I am convinced that it is our duty as elected representatives to rethink our food systems based on the lessons learned from the health crisis and taking into account various red flags that have changed in recent years in terms of health, biodiversity or climate. It is essential to change agricultural and food models and to change them on a sustainable path, while, of course, supporting farmers in these changes and raising consumer awareness. Yes, because we will have to learn how to produce differently and how to consume differently if we want to respond to the climate challenge before us. Agriculture must become even more virtuous, less chemical, but also more respectful of human health, the environment, water, soil and biodiversity, as well as ecosystems. Let's not be mistaken. The vote on the Farm to Fork report is an important step. We will determine whether or not the European Parliament agrees to put in place the necessary tools to build the world of tomorrow. And I want to say it here: The solutions are in nature and not in the technological whole or the genomic whole. The public interest must prevail in order to provide a future for future generations.

Mr President, this oral question is part of the UN Food Systems Summit to be held at the end of this month. It is skilful, because it makes it possible to legitimize this summit in European fora. However, this summit is denounced by civil society actors as a strategy of influence of agribusiness and agrochemical multinationals at the expense of institutions such as the FAO Special Food Council. Colleagues, we cannot condone an attempt to seize global food governance through the false nose of a few billionaire foundations. States, farmers’ organisations and all stakeholders cannot be deliberately left behind to roll out the red carpet to the riskiest technological solutions, but the most profitable for the few. Let's not be fooled. We know that global hunger is not linked to a lack of production. It is a consequence of the increase in inequalities. And we also know that fighting hunger effectively requires a fair distribution of agricultural and fish resources and defending food sovereignty, i.e. the ability of people to control their food.

Madam President, since 2019, your Commission has taken important steps, in particular with the European Green Deal and the health strategy, and we must be grateful for that. But the pandemic we are experiencing is not an isolated health crisis and you know it. We are at the heart of a meta-crisis inherent in the capitalist system – social and economic crisis, ecological crisis, political crisis. Our great challenge is to solve all these crises and this can only be done through deep questioning and action, because our current policies and our way of life are in permanent conflict with our planetary and human boundaries, and that is what needs to change. Our political group, through our President Iratxe García, has already put forward a first set of strong political proposals, from the anti-poverty law to the reform of tax rules, a pillar of social rights, respect for human rights and the real transformation of the European Semester, based on sustainable well-being rather than just GDP. But you will also need to strengthen the EU’s strategic autonomy and participate in the reform of the global multilateral system by reactivating, among other things, the WTO; pave the way for a real transformation of our agricultural and food model, and more broadly of our economic, social and ecological system; also pave the way for gender equality, closely linked to the UN Global Agenda for Sustainable Development Goals. And it is on the basis of these requirements that our group will assess whether your Commission is up to the task facing Europe and humanity as a whole.

Madam President, Vice-President, Prime Minister, the beginnings of the Slovenian Presidency of the European Union are stormy to say the least. Prime Minister, your slander of MEPs, but also of judges and journalists, shocked the whole of Europe, as you know. I am glad to hear that, as you yourself say, the European Union brings together countries with different traditions, with different cultures, that there are differences that must be taken into account and respected. But I would like to point out here that there is also a common basis: European values, respect for democratic standards, respect for the fundamental rights of every individual – whatever their political, religious or sexual orientation, whatever their skin colour and whether they are men or women. There can be no compromise with respect for fundamental rights and this new presidency cannot be an excuse, ladies and gentlemen, to turn a blind eye to behaviour which, I repeat, is not acceptable at the time of this new presidency.