Debate contributions by Norbert LINS

Madam President, Commissioner! Dear colleagues! With the agreement on the CAP simplification package, we are sending a strong signal to our farmers across Europe. We understood that the rules of the common agricultural policy were too rigid, too fragmented and too unworkable. And we act. With tomorrow's vote, we will ensure that the simplifications arrive quickly and unbureaucratically at the farms. In particular, the cut-off date scheme for grassland classification, but also the facilitation of erosion protection, is a clear step forward and will reduce bureaucracy. Relief for small businesses is also welcome. But we also need to reduce bureaucracy beyond the CAP. This is particularly true in the field of plant protection. I hope that tomorrow the Commission will put forward good, forward-looking proposals in this regard. Last week, a so-called environmental omnibus was proposed. I believe that this is not yet the breakthrough in terms of the relief for farmers when it comes to the Habitats Directive, when it comes to: Nature restoration law when it comes to the Nitrates Directive, when it comes to the relief for the biogas sector. So we have taken the right direction, we are moving forward courageously, but there are still many adjustments to be made to make agriculture in Europe competitive and sustainable.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen! One I like, the other I'm not quite convinced yet. What are we talking about? On the one hand, the reform of the common organisation of the market and, on the other hand, the simplification package relating to the common agricultural policy of our European Union. I really have concerns about the reform of the common organisation of the market. I believe we are questioning decades of traditional relationships, supply relationships, stable value chains and markets with the current reform. I think we're shooting well beyond the target. I see, at least in my analysis, more stable markets and better prices in those Member States where, for example, Article 148 has not yet been transposed than in those where it has already been transposed. We are now going right into these mandatory regulations. I am very much in favour of further simplifying the CAP. This is absolutely in the right direction. I believe that our mandate will strengthen this. I look forward to the trilogues. Above all, it is a matter of finding a solution quickly. The rules must enter into force on 1 January next year. And when it comes to grassland: Who puts the pressure on grassland? If you have to obtain arable status, then you are not able to continue to cultivate grassland permanently. On the other hand, it is clear: The reduction of cattle herds in the European Union is putting more pressure on grassland. All those who are constantly fighting against animal food should think about it.

Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen! The common agricultural policy must continue to have an independent, reliable and at least inflation-adjusted budget after 2027. We also need an independent law at the European level. We are in charge of the common agricultural policy. It is about planning security for the farmers also in view of the geopolitical global uncertainties, the volatile markets. It is about food security. It is about the competitiveness of agriculture within the European Union and also externally. So it's not about the end in itself, it's about the farmers in Europe. It is also about rural areas. The Commissioner has also spoken of healthcare in rural areas, of broadband. It is about the future of rural areas. That is why we need a first pillar and a second pillar that brings together rural areas. It is about the cohesion of society in Europe, about the cohesion of city and country. Nothing less is at stake. That is why I would like to see a clear signal from the Commission next week.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen. It was finally understood that our European farmers are a central pillar in the EU and that we therefore have to work with them and not against them. The Commission's proposal with this vision sends an important signal to agriculture and rural areas in Europe that the message has really arrived in Brussels and that we now have the opportunity to work on the important acute aspects. The vision is clearly committed to food production and in particular to animal husbandry in Europe. It is good that we are moving away from conditionality and that we are getting more incentives in agriculture. The Commission rightly emphasises the importance of adaptation to climate change and the crucial role of future issues such as the bioeconomy. I very much welcome the fact that there is another CAP simplification package. However, I believe that we need more speed in cross-sectoral legislation – it is good that an omnibus is planned there. Simplification of fertilisation rules and plant protection is urgently needed; We need more speed, the faster, the better. Agriculture is the backbone of our society and rural areas in particular. The open question is: We get (Tone off). That is the crucial question in the coming months. Let's fight for that together!

So, if I understood the question correctly, it was about international trade and the role of agriculture in it. I believe that our ambition must be to include sustainability in future trade agreements. So that standards that are self-evident to us, which we have given ourselves, then also apply to imports from other parts of the world. I believe this is our most important point that we need to enforce in future trade agreements.

Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen! I believe we see it was a good idea to launch this strategic dialogue, following the polarisation of the agricultural debate by former Vice-President Frans Timmermans, who was responsible for the biggest loss of confidence of farmers in the European Commission in its entire history. Farmers are back at the table, and I believe this paper, this result, is the way forward – a first step if we see that it also includes incentives instead of prohibitions and conditions. We are no longer talking about blanket reduction targets. It is quite clear that it has been recognised that there are socio-economic reasons for CAP payments, so we need to see that we focus them even better and that they are distributed even better and more correctly. But there are reasons, for example, to accompany structural change and, at best, to mitigate it. What remains questionable for me, if there is a blanket requirement, is that we must constantly increase eco-regulations. You can see it in this year's harvest result, where for the first time in my country we planted and sowed less than 6 million hectares of grain. Of course, this is also an effect of previous decisions. Adapting to climate change costs a lot of money; To this end, we need a sufficient CAP budget. I believe that the strategic dialogue has better approaches than the Draghi report, which only speaks again of the fact that agriculture in Europe is getting too much. We are on the right track, and we have it in our hands to make a good, a better policy now than in the past period.