News

Last week, French Agriculture Minister Julien Denormandie called for a revision of the methodology used for Nutri-Score nutrition labelling, to avoid penalizing traditional French foods such as high-fat or high-salt cheeses. Denormandie said that the Nutri-Score methodology is quantitative and leads to a classification that may not necessarily be in line with eating habits. Therefore, especially for cheeses, according to the French minister, there is a risk that they will receive a "bad" designation, i.e., "red", on a coloured traffic light scale. The methodology used to award the Nutri-Score label therefore needs to be revised. However, Denormandie confirmed the importance of the Nutri-Score, saying that consumers demand clear information about the nutritional value of food, and this must be reflected.

On 26/10/2021, the EP Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development (COMAGRI) adopted a motion for a resolution of the Committee on on-farm animal welfare. The resolution was approved by a vote of 36 in favour, 5 against, and 7 abstentions The proposal was not supported by MEPs who have long sought to reduce livestock production in the EU or restrict or ban the transport of live animals in the EU - Anja Hazekamp (GUE / NGL, NL) or Martin Häusling (Greens, DE). The rapporteur for the motion for a resolution was French MEP Jérémy Decerle (Renew), who is himself a farmer active in the livestock sector. The resolution was therefore relatively positively perceived by European agricultural organizations. The motion for a resolution call for EU animal welfare rules to be uniformly implemented in all Member States in the future and to be based on scientific data and impact assessments. The Committee also supported the introduction of voluntary animal welfare labelling in the EU. However, among the proposals approved were those that agricultural representatives tended not to support or criticize, such as an urgent call on the Commission to link the new rules on welfare, trade, and promotion to the objectives of the European Green Deal, Farm to Fork, and the European Biodiversity strategy. The Committee therefore calls for the revised animal welfare legislation to be fully in line with the priorities of the Green Deal and the Farm to Fork strategy. The resolution must now be approved by the plenary of the European Parliament, probably during the December part-session.
More information is available here.

The European Parliament adopted an opinion on Farm to Fork on 19/10/2021, as approved by the EP's Committees on Agriculture and Rural Development (COMAGRI) and the Environment (COMENVI) in the first half of September. In addition to the original opinion, only one article has been added in which MEPs acknowledge that recent studies emphasize the need for thorough scientific ex-ante impact assessments to address economic, social, and environmental sustainability, and that any legislative proposals must consider the cumulative effects, possible compromises, the availability of resources to achieve the objectives and the different agricultural models in the Member States. The European Commission has promised to prepare individual impact assessments on the main objectives of the strategy. By adopting its opinion, the European Parliament has supported, for example, the introduction of binding targets for the reduction of pesticides but emphasized that achieving this target depends on the availability of safer, more efficient, and effective alternatives. The Commission should also consider the different starting situations of the Member States as well as the differences in the efforts made when setting the targets. Parliament also supported the adoption of appropriate and adapted regulatory measures and targets for agricultural emissions and related land use as part of the FitFor55 package to ensure an ambitious reduction of all greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture and other affected areas, inter alia by addressing livestock density in EU and land use emissions related to imported feed and food. Parliament therefore called for a comprehensive policy mix to allow for a transition to more sustainable practices, such as extensive livestock production. The new opinion also responds to the European Commission's initiative to support the cessation of cage farming - Parliament has supported a ban on cage farming after 2027, but the ban must be based on scientific results, and a sufficient transition period must be provided. Parliament also supported the proposal to set aside at least 10% of agricultural land to support high-diversity landscape features that are essential for the preservation of basic ecosystem services. The new opinion also calls on the Commission to ensure that mandatory and harmonized nutrition labelling on the front of EU food packaging is developed based on reliable and independent scientific evidence and demonstrable consumer understanding. During the debate with MEPs, the European Commission rejected the fact that it had already been decided to propose a Nutri-Score labelling scheme; a specific system, which the Commission will eventually support, has reportedly not yet been decided. MEPs also state in the opinion that introducing real food prices that reflect the real costs of production, but also to address related environmental and health issues, is the most effective way to achieve long-term sustainable and fair food systems. In this context, Parliament supported that Member States have more flexibility in differentiating VAT rates for foods with different health and environmental impacts and that they should be able to opt for a zero VAT rate for healthy and sustainable foods and foods with a high ecological footprint. Parliament also supported the reformulation of food and the setting of maximum levels for salt, sugar, and fat in food to reduce the risks to public health of excessive consumption of highly processed foods and other products high in salt, sugar, and fat. The opinion was adopted by 452 votes in favour, 170 against and 76 abstentions.
The final text is available here.

The European Commission has long been criticized by European agri-food organizations for its reluctance to carry out a cumulative assessment of the impact of the implementation of the Farm to Fork objectives on the EU agri-food sector. European agricultural organizations have therefore asked European universities (such as the German University of Kiel or the Dutch University of Wageningen) to carry out cumulative impact studies, the results of which warn against a slump in European production or an increase in import dependence. The European Commission issued a statement on 18/10/2021 stating that the studies provided the scientific community and policy makers with valuable information on the choice of policy instruments to mitigate the risks of target implementation, however, according to the Commission, the models used in all studies are not able to consider changes on the demand side or support provided by new legislative initiatives and the new CAP. The studies therefore focus only on some aspects of the Farm to Fork strategy, and their negative results should therefore be taken with caution. The Commission stated earlier, in the first half of October 2021, that it was not planning to carry out a cumulative impact assessment itself, given the impracticability of such a study and the heavy burden that an attempt to draw up would entail.
A detailed overview of the focus of each study was provided by the Commission here.

The European Parliament adopted an opinion on the European strategy on methane on 21/10/2021. Parliament calls on the Commission to propose a fair, comprehensive and clear legislative framework setting binding measures and targets for reducing methane emissions in all sectors, which will lead to significant reductions in methane emissions in the EU by 2030; Stresses the need for a uniform review of EU environmental and climate legislation to reflect increased ambitions in line with the objectives of the Paris Agreement; Calls on the Commission to propose an overarching and binding legislative framework for methane emissions in order to avoid unnecessary duplication of legislation; Stresses the importance of adopting mandatory monitoring, reporting and verification for all methane-producing sectors, for example through the adoption of rules, standards and methodologies; And calls on the Commission to include methane in the zero-pollution monitoring framework. In its opinion, Parliament stated that agriculture was the largest anthropogenic source of methane emissions in the EU, but EU greenhouse gas emissions from European agriculture (including livestock farming) fell by 22.2% between 1990 and 2018 in the EU-28, due to a 21% reduction in methane emissions from agriculture (enteric fermentation by 22% and manure management by 17%). However, Parliament emphasizes that future policy decisions will need to provide a solid framework for the livestock sector to ensure a degree of predictability and calls on the Commission to explore the possibility of establishing a regulatory framework for carbon sequestration certification in line with the EU climate legal framework.
More information is available here.