Green light for Nature Restoration Law of his last steps, those that should be definitive. In the trilogue between European Comission (who wrote the law), European Parliament (who votes for her) and Council of Europe (ministers of the 27), a minimum agreement has been reached for the drafting of this very controversial law, which should serve to restore biodiversity. As? Not only protecting but with proactive measures that serve to recover degraded ecosystemsboth terrestrial and marine.
The agreement was reached shortly before eleven pm this Thursday after almost eleven hours of discussion. The challenge of the negotiation was to find points of consensus so that when the law returns to the European Parliament it is approved without problems and not in extremis, as happened in July.
Why so much controversy?
What happened then and why did the law cause so much controversy? Parliament approved it six votes differencebut the environmental commission did not approve it since among its members there was a tie of yeses and noes.
This week, the text had to submit to this multilateral trilogue in search of an agreement. It was difficult but it was achieved. And now, the law, more alive than ever, faces the last procedure. That is, go through the camera again so that it is definitively validated.
⭕️ AGREEMENT
✅ The Nature Restoration Law begins the last phase of its processing 🇪🇺
» The most important environmental law of the last 30 years
Protecting is not enough
→ It’s time to restore(1/4) pic.twitter.com/qhAVpgObwx
— Ecological Transition and Demographic Challenge (@mitecogob) November 9, 2023
“With this law we all win. Europe is committed with the restoration of their ecosystems. We conserve, protect and restore“, celebrates Teresa Ribera, Minister for the Ecological Transition and the Demographic Challenge, who traveled to Brussels to participate in the final negotiation. “It is a very important agreement. We are talking about restoring what generates not only life but also social economic services, with an impact on our activities,” she adds.
During the last months, the European People’s Party and the far-right groups were very opposed to this law and demonstrated against its approval. They consider that it goes against farmers, since the possibility of protecting agricultural areas was raised (without making it explicit that they should stop being cultivated). Unions and lobbies favorable to intensive agriculture They raised their voices to prevent the law from advancing. However, Parliament approved it with the support of Socialists, Greens and Liberals.
Discounts for consensus
The text will force the countries of the European Union to recover 30% of degraded habitats in 2050, in line with what was agreed in the biodiversity summit in Montreal. This will imply ambitious protection measures.
“The situation in which it is not possible to meet an objective will be respected”
Teresa Ribera, Minister for the Ecological Transition
However, the law has suffered sales to obtain the approval of the majority of those involved. The first of them is flexibility when it comes to complying with what is established. “There will be dates and objectivesgreat importance will be given to national measures, but the situation in which for a justified reason it is not possible to meet an objective will be respected,” explains Riverbank.
Furthermore, the law will only require these measures to be taken in areas of the Natura 2000 Network (which are already protected). This nuance did not please scientists in defense of biodiversity or environmental groups like WWF (World Wide Fund for Nature).
“It is not what we wanted but it is positive that there is a law with clear objectives”
Luis Suarez, WWF
Luis Suarezspokesperson for WWF Spain, in statements to EL PERIÓDICO, acknowledges that it is not what they wanted: “Dont have much sense make a law to conserve only what is theoretically already protected by a directive that obliges you to maintain a good state of conservation of these habitats”.
Related news
In any case, in the organization, they understand that it is a joint compromise solution and they applaud that there is a law and that it has not been left for the next legislature: “That there is a law with clear objectives and the obligation of the states to approve national plans and demonstrate compliance is a great advance“.
In it CREAF (Center for Ecological Research and Forestry Applications) are also satisfied with the fact that the law come forward and is closer to being a reality, although they admit that it could have been more ambitious, as was the initial text drafted by the European Commission.