The European Commission may be prepared to adjust its proposed Nature Restoration law (NRL) and reconcile with some legislators that have vehemently objected to the bill, an exploratory non-paper circulated on Thursday suggests.
The document, seen by Carbon Pulse, has been sent to member states as well as MEPs and is meant as “just a contribution to the ongoing discussion” rather than a firm policy shift, a spokesperson for the EU executive said.
The non-paper outlined “possible avenues for moving forward, as a basis for further discussions, specifically on those provisions that have been highlighted as potentially limiting the possibility of member states to develop economic activities”.
This fairly unusual interjection from the Commission follows tensions over the bill among legislators for weeks, with several cross-party committees rejecting it outright, and the centre-right EPP opposing it due to the perceived strain will place upon the bloc’s food security.
The Parliament and the Council of member states are scrutinising the bill in parallel, eventually needing to reconcile a final position with the Commission over the coming months.
MULTIPLE FRONTS
The non-paper suggests the Commission is trying to solve troubles on multiple fronts, including: EU-wide targets, the overarching principle that land should not be allowed to deteriorate further, and the goal of accelerating the deployment of renewables.
It also aims to tackle differences over the bill’s alignment with the proposed Critical Raw Materials Act, urban ecosystems, funding and financial compensations, and a “stepwise” approach to designing the national restoration plans among several others.
On the specific issues around the non-deterioration of habitats, there will be a “heated debate” among member states’ ambassadors due to will reunite on Friday, a source told Carbon Pulse.
Some MEPs worried that this principle “could create issues” for the availability of land for things like housing and renewable energy.
The Commission’s response tried to accommodate their concerns by suggesting that the non-deterioration provisions “can be reformulated to make the obligation effort based” in that they would require measures to be put in place but not a specific outcome.
The non-paper added that regional and local specificities could also be taken into account by the Commission when assessing the national restoration plans.
On this topic, the Council opted for national restoration plans covering the period until June 2032, with a strategic overview for the period beyond June 2032, instead of full plans until 2050 two years after the entry into force of the regulation.
Then, by June 2032, member states would submit restoration plans until 2042 with a strategic overview until 2050 and by June 2042 they would submit plans until 2050.
The Council also added the possibility for member states to take into account specific national varieties.
PARLIAMENT PRESSURE
The document came out just one day after three EPP members – Anne Sander, Esther de Lange, and chief negotiator Christine Schneider – convened a press conference on the need for a different proposal.
Schneiders said she was put under heavy pressure to back the bill in meeting with EU climate chief Frans Timmermans and environment chief Virginijus Sinkevicius.
The MEP explained that the two Commissioners had told her to accept the text “or the Commission won’t table” any of the proposals that the EPP has been pushing for, such as an upcoming legislation on breeding innovation that could bring more technological advancement into the agricultural sector.
A Commission spokesperson rejected the MEPs’ talk of being “threatened” over the bill.
“Timmermans met with different MEPs during the last Strasbourg session to explain the proposals, hear their specific concerns, and offer support to find targeted solutions,” another told Carbon Pulse.
Schneiders said the upcoming vote in the environment committee on June 15 was “50-50” in its outcome, before a vote of the full Parliament in a plenary vote.
As the Greens, Left, and centre-left S&D groups have mainly shown their support for the bill, all eyes have been on the centrist Renew Europe.
Asked about Renew’s orientation, a spokesperson told Carbon Pulse that “ it is too early to start up speculations about voting behaviour in plenary” and “there are different opinions” in the group.
“Some are in favour of the NRL, while others are still considering their opinions,” they said.
In parallel discussions among the Council of member states, various sources who had seen a leaked draft agreement suggested that the governments were supportive of the Commission’s proposal in its main points.
Council officials are still aiming for a united position to be reached at a ministerial meeting on June 20, though much is dependent on Friday’s preparatory session, one source told Carbon Pulse.
By Emanuela Barbiroglio – emanuela@carbon-pulse.com
