Sarah WIENER (Greens/EFA, AT), rapporteur on Sustainable use of pesticides, gives a press conference after the vote in ENVI Committee meeting. This transcription is a result of an automatic process. Please check against delivery.

Brussels

press conference

use of pesticides and herbicides (T)

WIENER, Sarah (Greens/EFA, AT)

Press conference by Sarah WIENER (Greens/EFA, AT), rapporteur on Sustainable use of pesticides

SOUNDBITE (German), Sarah WIENER (Greens/EFA, AT), Rapporteur, Before I come on to the report I would like to make a comment. Not just as a rapporteur, but also as an MEP, relating to the fight which we've had over the past year between different groups. And I regret this on a personal basis, because today I hoped to have the possibility to have a majority during the course of which all political parties would have been able to find a compromise which would suit them.

SOUNDBITE (German), Sarah WIENER (Greens/EFA, AT), Rapporteur, Unfortunately, we have not been able to get a strong position, which all of us can go along with. As you will recall, there has been a struggle on this long before my draft was drafted, particularly from those on the radical right, and this has not changed.

SOUNDBITE (German), Sarah WIENER (Greens/EFA, AT), Rapporteur, I should just like to say that in a press communication of the EPP from Mr. Peter Liese, who is still the political speaker for the EPP on climate and who is not speaking as an agricultural specialist and who is linked up with the chair of the Agricultural Affairs Committee, who is one of his group today with Sarah Vine, and EPP political majority popular majority was found.

SOUNDBITE (German), Sarah WIENER (Greens/EFA, AT), Rapporteur, Now, we have to look at this issue of whether farmers have to be forced to go onto eco farming or whether this is just a ban on pesticides. I really have to counter this very strongly because on the one hand, this idea of an eco popular majority and this being something which I am supposed to have said, we are not eco populists, and I think that conservative renew members would not agree with this at all. And even a few socialists would actually distance themselves from this quite a lot.

SOUNDBITE (German), Sarah WIENER (Greens/EFA, AT), Rapporteur, The issue it takes is that, if before we get a compromise or try to get to a compromise, we start waging war with each other and nobody moves, then in the next legislative period, we're certainly going to have far more problems than we have currently. And unfortunately, the Agricultural Affairs Committee is a modern example of poor communication and one sided radical statements which don't help.

SOUNDBITE (German), Sarah WIENER (Greens/EFA, AT), Rapporteur, Has taught me that we've got to actually bring them down a bit, too, because a compromise is if you move towards me and if you then want to have a compromise that's only a 100% EPP, you've seen today, this is something which doesn't work. And why did we get to a majority? Because all other parties, as far as the radical right, even have said that for the environment, for biodiversity, because of the climate crisis, and in order to give the farmers more freedom and more stability and more security, we need to get to a compromise. So everybody has sacrificed something.

SOUNDBITE (German), Sarah WIENER (Greens/EFA, AT), Rapporteur, Therefore, without the rights and the radical rights and the Eurosceptics, we've come to a compromise, a compromise that we voted on today, and we got a really good firm majority for this. And I shall just like to go on a little bit in to the balance of this. Now, the committee made it clear today that pesticides have got to be reduced. We had 50% chemical similar pesticides to be reduced and 50% of dangerous pesticides. The so-called substitute candidates, pesticides which should have been banned for years because they are actually poisonous, they damage fruits, they damage the environment, they can be carcinogenic and they pollute water as well. I'll come back to that later.

SOUNDBITE (German), Sarah WIENER (Greens/EFA, AT), Rapporteur, So I should just like to say that we're talking about chemical pesticides which should be reduced and not other substances which affect ecological soils. So, included in this you have the possibility to use pesticides which are biological or which are used in biological farming and organic farming. So we've got a list of these.

SOUNDBITE (German), Sarah WIENER (Greens/EFA, AT), Rapporteur, The Environment Committee is advocating a reduction on the basis of Member State plans. So why have we done this? We've seen what's happened over the past ten years and therefore the Commission has now come up with a regulation rather than a directive. And this means that there now have to be binding targets for each individual member states.

SOUNDBITE (German), Sarah WIENER (Greens/EFA, AT), Rapporteur, I must say in this context that in our draft we did try to take account of the fact that these are binding member targets as they are to be, should be such as to ensure that the frontrunners, those countries which don't use many pesticides at the moment would have 50% rather than 35%. And a lot of countries, as I said, have actually done a lot and have not used that many pesticides. So we tried to moderate it that way and we have also adjusted and extended the period. So it is now 2013 to 2015 to 2017 onwards, and this means that certain countries will have fewer problems in reducing the amount of pesticides that they use.

SOUNDBITE (German), Sarah WIENER (Greens/EFA, AT), Rapporteur, What is important is that the EU countries each have to submit a national action plan relating to these targets. And what is very important and what was very important for me was the amendment and that pesticide reduction problems should be just as important as the SUR. So if a member state and this is something which is particularly important for Germany, if a member state has an operational pesticide reduction program, then it should be on an equal basis as the SUR rules.

SOUNDBITE (German), Sarah WIENER (Greens/EFA, AT), Rapporteur, Secondly, you're going to put a question to me, If I've forgotten something, we'll come to one of the major points of dispute, the sensitive areas. You've heard, that there's a total ban and this total ban, which originally was in the commission's original SUR sustainable use regulation, was taken back on board by the commission in the so-called non-paper, so that they could look at this further and come up with a wide range of possibilities on the use of pesticides in sensitive areas and the use of certain types of pesticides without defining exactly what the sensitive areas were.

SOUNDBITE (German), Sarah WIENER (Greens/EFA, AT), Rapporteur, Just to make sure that farmers were going to be able to survive. In our proposal, what was important for us was the autonomy of the individual member states. This is something we felt should be strengthened because this is what is required EU wide. And this means that in the individual areas eco pesticides and biological pesticides should be authorized. But if the member State itself feels that the issue is not relevant for certain sensitive areas, whether these are protected agricultural areas or other sensitive areas, then each member state can authorize the major exemptions and can authorize this themselves.

SOUNDBITE (German), Sarah WIENER (Greens/EFA, AT), Rapporteur, In principle, this works because if you think that in your country, for example, vintners or others feel that it is necessary and nature 2000 areas to have exemptions because there are no alternatives to chemical pesticides, then the member state actually can make use of this. So it is an absolute downright lie if they say that it is a total ban on pesticides. That is not principally a ban on chemical pesticides, but chemical pesticides should be the pesticides of the the the last pesticides that used prior to that. You should try ecological and biological methods.

SOUNDBITE (German), Sarah WIENER (Greens/EFA, AT), Rapporteur, What we need is an honest statement from the environmental Committee and this is something which we should applaud because we want to protect biodiversity and we want to protect people, we want to protect farmers, we want to protect the countryside. So protected areas can be decided upon in terms of their relevance by member states and exemptions can be created by member states very easily. So farmers don't have to fear for their future.

SOUNDBITE (German), Sarah WIENER (Greens/EFA, AT), Rapporteur, But there is something which we have strengthened. Stronger rules for hospitals, schools, parks and kindergartens. If we cannot in the European Parliament, agree that children, vulnerable groups, weak people can be better protected from pesticides than perhaps somebody who is 100 meters away, then quite honestly, we are lacking something. What we have done, however, is, as rapporteur, I must say, that we've extended the buffer zones from 3 to 5 meters, five meters.

SOUNDBITE (German), Sarah WIENER (Greens/EFA, AT), Rapporteur, Now, tell me, is this not crazy? Is it not eco populist? Please tell me. I have asked every shadow rapporteur whether they agree with this, and they do. Originally, I had 50 meters in the original report because there are actually countries that which are decided on ten meters already. But five meters was the only border that they would agree with, that we could get agreement on.

SOUNDBITE (German), Sarah WIENER (Greens/EFA, AT), Rapporteur, So now parks in major cities. We know that you can have parks without chemical pesticides. There are huge cities like Paris which don't use pesticides. So that's the part that's where I go to for my recreation, for my leisure. That's where I go to recover when I'm feeling tired and I take my kids along with me as well. And in terms of an exemption there, we had a right to a populist attack on us because they were saying that everybody has to actually put up a sign board to say what is being sprayed and why they're spraying it. And this is absolutely not true either, because this is something which member states governments have to decide on.

SOUNDBITE (German), Sarah WIENER (Greens/EFA, AT), Rapporteur, There is an exemption. For example, if you have certain pests which produce a really bad problem quickly and something which is hard to deal with, then there can be an exemption for 60 days and that can be spraying for 60 days and then a noticeboard should be put up. So if Mrs. van der Leyen is talking about eco populists as well, then quite honestly, we've got to turn to the EPP and ask them what's behind this.

SOUNDBITE (German), Sarah WIENER (Greens/EFA, AT), Rapporteur, Therefore, I think it is pretty tough when we note certain statements about certain things, when people haven't read things properly, and quite honestly, we really need to look at exactly what is in the Integrated Plan Management. This is a really important instrument.

SOUNDBITE (German), Sarah WIENER (Greens/EFA, AT), Rapporteur, We don't just want a replacement from a chemical pesticide to another type of pesticide. We want a real transformation of our agriculture and therefore there should be free consultation for farmers, strategic consultation, which is binding, and this is something which should give farmers the possibility to get independent advice and to get help, which they perhaps do not have today. And also knowledge which can be transferred to them.

SOUNDBITE (German), Sarah WIENER (Greens/EFA, AT), Rapporteur, So talking about consultation and support for farmers, for me, the transformation to be supported, financially supported, is unfortunately in the agri committee, that is Article 53, it's been weakened because to get money for a minimum standards, if you can call it, and that is what we wanted. So what we are trying to do is to incorporate a new article in which Member States should be obliged to provide professional possibilities.

SOUNDBITE (German), Sarah WIENER (Greens/EFA, AT), Rapporteur, And even here I am wondering whether this assumed representatives of agricultural policy are really those farmers on the ground. Are they really representing farmers? Are they really representing people who are farming their farms every day and who perhaps would regret if they don't get the necessary support that they need?

SOUNDBITE (German), Sarah WIENER (Greens/EFA, AT), Rapporteur, In the end, we may see others who are boycotting it, so we didn't get this in the end. But as I'm saying, I'm not talking as rapporteur. I'm talking a Sarah Wiener, MEP at the moment. I'm still a young politician, it seems, who doesn't know that much. And of course, the emotions that that has caused within me after this 18 months of negotiations. Now we come to the highly hazardous pesticides, the so-called substitute pesticides, which really do have to be replaced because they are highly toxic.

SOUNDBITE (German), Sarah WIENER (Greens/EFA, AT), Rapporteur, The commission put forward a target of 50% and we came up with a compromise 65% reduction, although in my draft we had the figure of 80%. So once again, this is a compromise, and I would just like to point out, as I said previously, that we start with 15% and then we extend this and have a broader basis for measurements. And de facto, the 50 and 65% are going to be improved anyway. So as you'll see and I want to be honest here, I can't really sell this as a success, but nevertheless, if we're honest with ourselves, it's not necessarily going to be exactly 65%.

SOUNDBITE (German), Sarah WIENER (Greens/EFA, AT), Rapporteur, Just to wind up and this is something which I think we can all agree on and this is positive, there is a new article for stopping exports for banned pesticides and a stop on imports for highly toxic pesticides. So toxic pesticides which are banned here are not to be exported and they're not to be imported into the EU again, either. This is going to be something which is not feasible in the future. We've set up a level playing field, so to speak, and of course we hope that the conditions which apply to our own European farmers also apply to others if they want to import something.

SOUNDBITE (German), Sarah WIENER (Greens/EFA, AT), Rapporteur, So what's going to happen now? On the 22nd of November the plenary is going to vote on the final Parliament position and I hope that better communications, better discussions and an understanding of our mutual positions will lead to a robust, good, solid compromise, a good position, which hurts everybody as always happens in a democracy, but nevertheless, as rapporteur, this is what I am aiming for.

SOUNDBITE (German), Sarah WIENER (Greens/EFA, AT), Rapporteur, Of course, negotiations, as you know, are continuing in council. And I think the 11th or the 15th of December, I think, is going to come up with some kind of common position. Let's find out. We wait to find out what that is. So that was my introduction to the SUR, and I'd be really happy if you've got any questions that you'd like to put to me now. Thank you.

Q&A, Question on the final text on the Sustainable Use of Pesticides and the vote in plenary.

Q&A, Question regarding on low risks pesticides and the overall proposal by the EP to reduce the use of pesticides in Europe. Second concerning the potential limitations that the regulation on the sustainable use of plant protection products in certain european regions, and Germany in particular.

Q&A, Question on lower risk pesticides and biological pesticides focusing on the respective position of the Parliament and the Commission.

Q&A, Question regarding the complex path that led glyphosate text to be voted.

Q&A, Question on the proposed binding reduction target on pesticides for each Member State.

Q&A, Question on clasification based on pesticides in the voted text.