The commission's proposals are turning counterproductive by creating uncertainty in the basic premises of the operating environment, business and land ownership. MTK and Finnish producers took part in a demonstration in Brussels on Thursday 1 June on the EU's recent regulations on agriculture and forestry. The demonstration was organised by Copa-Cogeca, an EU association of farmers and agricultural cooperatives, and Boerenbond, an association of Belgian farmers.

Although we have recently succeeded in steering the proposals in the right direction, the commission is failing in its latest proposals.  MTK raised the problems of the restoration regulation more than a year ago. Now, the rest of Europe has woken up to the problematic nature of the regulation. The most appropriate thing would be to return the unacceptable proposal back to the commission's preparations.

With its proposals, the commission is jeopardising the operating environment of rural livelihoods, food production and security of supply. Recently, the council and parliament have aligned themselves with the commission, for instance by agreeing on the deforestation regulation. This must stop. The commission's incomprehensible proposals cannot be completed. The next step is the fate of the problematic restoration regulation.

"The commission's actions are incomprehensible, thus legislators must show the Commission its place. We are forced to deal with problems caused by the deforestation regulation, but it is still possible to stop the restoration regulation," says Juha Marttila, the president of MTK.

MTK is committed to stop biodiversity loss and mitigate climate change. MTK and SLC have previously drawn up a climate roadmap and are now working on a roadmap for solving biodiversity challenges with the help of researchers.

The reason for MTK's criticism is therefore not the objectives, but the means chosen by the commission. The commission is not receiving clear messages about the problems with its proposals and instead concentrates on convincing that the proposals have been misunderstood by critics.

"There are too many risks. The deforestation regulation may retroactively render milk and meat from farms that have invested in recent years unfit for the market. It was also close that forest energy, which is important for climate change mitigation, was put in the same category as fossil fuels. While the restoration regulation requires a complete overhaul, at the same time we must keep our eyes on upcoming legislation, for instance on soil health. It is high time that the member states and parliament put an end to the commission's poor practices," Marttila says.

During the summer, important votes will be held in the parliament, especially on the restoration regulation. If there is insufficient support in the committee on the environment to reject the entire proposal on the restoration regulation, a very problematic report will probably go to plenary in the parliament. The trilogue negotiations should not proceed with a bad position from the parliament, so returning the proposal to the new preparation requires unanimity across party and country lines.

Additional information:

Juha Marttila, President, MTK, +358 50 341 3167
Marko Mäki-Hakola, Forest Director, MTK, +358 40 502 6810