Farmers in the French sugar beet sector have taken to the streets of Paris in their tractors to protest against a ban on pesticide use.
This follows a decision by the Court of Justice of the EU last month which stated that member states cannot grant derogations from bans on the marketing and use of seeds treated with plant protection products containing neonicotinoids.
👍Waouh! Impressive demonstration by 🇫🇷 #sugar #beet #growers & farmers in Paris, around 800 tractors gathered in "Les Invalides" to:
✅explain their urgent need &
❌condemn excess of regulations!@FnseaGBP @CGB_FR #LaBetteraveEnDanger #sauvetonpaysan @SanderFranck @_MissBetter pic.twitter.com/yqAGiXxHT4— C.I.B.E. (@SugarBeetEurope) February 8, 2023
These products are said to be toxic to bees.
However, French beet farmers believe the use of these products is necessary for their sector.
In response to the court’s ruling, some 800 tractors and 2,000 farmers have assembled in Paris, centered around Les Invalides, one of France’s most recognisable landmarks.
The protest has the backing of the country’s leading farm organisation, the FNSEA, as well as organisations representing the sugar beet producing sector.
Protesters gathered early this morning before arriving in the city centre of Paris, where they are currently gathered.
The protesters are using the slogan “no bans without solutions”, in reference to the Court of Justice’s ruling, and farmers, tractors and vehicles can be seen carrying signs and banners with those words in French (“pas d’interdiction sans solutions”).
Another slogan used by the protesters reads: “Don’t import agriculture we don’t want,” in reference to tillage and horticultural products that are imported into France.
According to the Court of Justice of the EU, the ban on pesticides containing neonicotinoids was adopted to ensure a high level of animal health protection within the EU.
A provision does exist whereby member states can, in exceptional circumstances, authorise the placing on the market of plant protection products that are not explicitly approved.
However, the court ruled that this does not extend to allowing derogations for products that are explicitly prohibited, or for seeds treated with these products.
In its judgement, the court also found that member states have an obligation to favour, whenever possible, low pesticide input and non-chemical plant protection methods.
This obligation, the court said, implies that producers should use those available products that present the lowest risk for human health and the environment.