Irish MEP Mick Wallace has said that concerns raised over Ireland’s agricultural peat soils being classed as ‘degraded ecosystems’ under the Nature Restoration Law (NRL) are “entirely speculative”.
The NRL will face a major vote in the European Parliament today (Tuesday, February 27). If the law is defeated, it won’t be possible for it to be adopted under the EU’s usual legislative procedure without a new legislative proposal being put forward from scratch.
The Irish Natura and Hill Farmers’ Association (INHFA) has raised concerns that the law could see Irish beef and other products from so-called ‘degraded ecosystems’ displaced from international markets.
The INHFA suggested that beef produced on drained agricultural peatland in Ireland – which, according to the farm organisation, may be defined as a degraded ecosystem – could be treated the same as beef produced on deforested land in South America.
Wallace, an independent MEP, told Agriland he “fundamentally” disagrees with the view that agricultural peatlands would be defined as degraded ecosystems.
“Nowhere in the text of the provisional agreement we negotiated with the council is this suggested. No such designation will derive from the regulation. And the idea that the EU would apply some kind of degraded ecosystem label to EU products internally, based on an imagined response to the deforestation regulation…is entirely speculative,” he said.
The text of the law mentions the term ‘degraded ecosystem’ in a number of places, including in Article 1, describing the scope of the regulation. However, Wallace said that the term is not used in the definition of ‘restoration’.
Outside of that, the term is, according to Wallace, used only in parts that are not “legally actionable”, and in the annex to the law.
“Nowhere in the regulation is it suggested that farmers’ land will be defined as degraded as a result of the Nature Restoration Law,” he said.
The INHFA also said that particular grazing systems can be used to deliver the same climate and biodiversity advantages that the Nature Restoration Law is apparently seeking to achieve.
However, the farm organisation lamented that there is no provision in the law for such changes to the grazing system to be considered.
Responding to this point, Wallace said that, while the law does not have specific provision for considering grazing changes, there is also no provision excluding those changes from consideration.
“The public consultation process in the lead up to the drafting of Ireland’s nature restoration plan would provide ample opportunity to raise the benefits of such practices,” he said.
Wallace added: “Many farmers are totally against the regulation, and the IFA (Irish Farmers’ Association) and the INHFA have lobbied against the regulation, and I understand the INHFA is deeply distrustful of measures coming from Europe after they were so poorly treated with the (Natura 2000) designations.
“But I absolutely firmly believe that they should welcome the Nature Restoration Law. Farmers and landowners should not fear the regulation, but should instead welcome the opportunities it will provide,” he commented.
“Restoration does not mean taking land out of production. The regulation creates legal obligations for member states, but not for farmers. The restoration targets do not apply to farmers, only to the member states.”
According to Wallace, restoration measures will be voluntary for farmers, and that the law does not make any provision to force farmers into restoration measures.
“In Ireland we already have thousands of farmers signed up for results-based agri-environmental payment schemes. Some of these farmers are getting several thousand euro for their work. Nobody is forcing them,” the Ireland South MEP said.