The French maneuver to torpedo what’s left of the “nature restoration” pillar of the European Green Deal

03 October 2023

As the European Commission, Council and Parliament will meet in trilogue on 5 October and 16 November to seal the fate of European legislation on “nature restoration”, a pillar of the European Green Deal, the industrial fishing lobbies and their political accomplices (France and part of the European Commission) are leading the offensive to torpedo the only measure favorable to ocean protection and restoration that remains after unprecedented undermining by the Council and European Parliament.

In this final stretch, the fishing lobbies benefit from the support of heavyweights within the European Commission and the French government, as well as the murky game played by the MEPs of the presidential majority, Pierre Karleskind and Pascal Canfin, who supported Amendment 15, the only one capable of significantly improving the fate of the ocean. But the MEPs have yet to speak out publicly to denounce the operations underway. Their silence, which contrasts sharply with their eagerness in the media and on social networks to pass themselves off as champions following the vote on the “Nature Restoration Act” on 12 July, is worrying NGOs.

In the face of the climate and environmental emergency, the “Nature Restoration Law” could and should have been a historic turning point for the protection and restoration of marine ecosystems.

Scientists were calling for real protection and restoration of the ocean, but to no avail. In an unprecedented call, a majority of parliamentarians rejected the text in the parliamentary committees on Agriculture, Fisheries and the Environment. A “requiem for nature” was thus consecrated by a frightening anti-ecological alliance between the far right, the conservative and eurosceptic right, and the liberal right.

In the face of this storm, and while the European Union’s Member States met in Council to adopt a text trimmed on all sides, the outright rejection of the law was avoided in the final plenary vote on 12 July 2023 due to the massive mobilization of civil society.

 

A GUTTED LEGISLATION… WITH ONE EXCEPTION

As a result of this undermining, all measures designed to genuinely protect and restore the oceans were thrown out the window, including the two crucial and immediately effective amendments to ban destructive fishing methods in all marine “protected” areas of the European Union, and to exclude supertrawlers and vessels over 25 meters from the 12 nautical mile coastal strip.

At this stage, only one step forward remains in the face of this undertaking to destroy all ecological ambition: Amendment 15, supported by a broad coalition of associations dedicated to protecting the ocean and tabled by MEP Pierre Karleskind of the French presidential majority, on the “implementation of measures to restore marine ecosystems” to remove the diplomatic obstacles that States invoke ad nauseam to indefinitely postpone any ban on destructive fishing methods in so-called “protected” marine areas.

A Nature Restoration Law that has been completely gutted.

European Council and Parliament’s hunting list.

 

PROPOSALS FROM THE COMMISSION	AMENDMENTS TABLED IN THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT	ADOPTION OR REJECTION OF AMENDMENT IN EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT VOTE	POSITION ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL
Restore 30% of degraded ecosystems by 2030.	Exemption from the restoration target for soft-sediment seabeds, among the most trawled in Europe.	ADOPTED	Exemption from restoration target for soft-sediment seabeds, among the most trawled in Europe.
Obligation not to damage restored areas or areas undergoing restoration.	Obligation not to damage restored areas or areas undergoing restoration reduced from an obligation of result to an obligation of means.	ADOPTED	The non-deterioration obligation only applies in the event of “significant” deterioration
Obligation not to damage all ecosystems, including those not benefiting from restoration measures.	Removal of the non-deterioration obligation for ecosystems not benefiting from specific restoration measures.	ADOPTED	The obligation to prevent the deterioration of all ecosystems, including those not benefiting from restoration measures, moves from an obligation of result to an obligation of means.
Guaranteed access to justice for citizens and NGOs, to enable citizen control over the quality of national restoration plans.	Removal of all guarantees of access to justice for citizens and NGOs.	ADOPTED	The guarantee of access to justice for citizens and NGOs has been removed.
	Renewable energy projects considered to be of “overriding public interest” and able to be exempted from any restoration constraints, without having to prove “that there is no less damaging alternative“.	ADOPTED	Renewable energy projects are considered to be of “overriding public interest” and can be exempted from any restoration constraints, “without having to demonstrate the absence of a less damaging alternative“.
	Ban on destructive fishing methods in Marine Protected Areas.	REJECTED
	Exclusion of supertrawlers and other fishing vessels over 25 meters from the 12 nautical mile coastal band.	REJECTED
	Emergency clause to suspend implementation of restoration objectives in the event of an impact on “food production, food availability and food prices”.	ADOPTED
	Removal of diplomatic obstacles in the process of creating and managing Marine Protected Areas where vessels from various European states operate.	ADOPTED

 

THE TRILOGUE AS THE LAST HOPE FOR THE OCEAN

5 October sees the start of the final stage of this legislative process, the “trilogue”, which will consist of a series of closed-door meetings where the European Commission, Council and Parliament will attempt, in a final round of negotiations, to reach a final version acceptable to all three European institutions.

In the face of a major climate and environmental crisis, it would be a good idea to go back to the Commission’s proposal and raise its level of ambition, but the industrial fishing lobbies are working with some of the Commission and French departments to destroy Amendment 15, the only ocean-friendly amendment adopted by the European Parliament.

But trying to respect a thirty-year-old European law is clearly too difficult for industrial fishing lobbies, their representatives in the European Commission and the French government.

WHEELER-DEALERS BRINGING IN THE HOME STRETCh

Ahead of the 5 October trilogue, the European Commission’s Directorate General for Maritime Affairs (DG MARE) has published a document explaining that the amendment tabled by Pierre Karleskind does not have the “legal basis” to amend the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP). From a technical point of view, this amendment does not modify the CFP: it establishes a binding timetable for its implementation, and places the Commission as the body of last resort in the event of failure on the part of States.

But under the guise of legal expertise, and in order to maintain its pre-eminence on fisheries issues and respond favorably to the industrial fishing lobbies, DG MARE is proposing a “reformulation” that signs the proper burial of this amendment: removal of the binding deadlines and disappearance of the Commission’s role as the body of last resort.

The ocean is overheating, the climatic and environmental emergency is unprecedented, but the infighting within the Commission between the industrial fishing lobbies’ businessmen and the Environment Directorate officials is on the way to killing off the only measure favorable to ocean protection. France, which has already presented itself through its Secretary of State Hervé Berville as “totally, clearly and firmly opposed” to the ban on trawling in so-called “protected” marine areas, has jumped at the chance to make this amendment disappear, according to information shared by negotiators involved in the dossier, the only ones likely to shed light on what is going on behind the scenes ahead of these opaque meetings.

It remains to be seen whether the liberal right-wing parliamentarians, who took the law to pieces before claiming to have “won the greatest battle ever waged in the European Parliament“, and who have made this amendment their battle-horse to showcase their links with environmental protection associations and to embody their supposed independence from industrial fishing lobbies, will be able to stand up to lobbies, the French government and European Commission businessmen in order to save what can be still salvaged.

With the spotlight now elsewhere, the silence of Pierre Karleskind and Pascal Canfin does not bode well ahead of a trilogue behind closed doors. In this age of political spectacle, it’s up to these “common-sense ecology” advocates not to betray their 12 July vote by abandoning the one and only thing their parliamentary group hasn’t already nipped in the bud.